|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Where did GLAAD threaten a boycott over this? It's exactly what their organization was designed to do. In their own words, they "leverage" other corporations or institutions to comply with their principles using social engineering tactics. Boycotting is a basic necessity for the success of their campaigns. Plus we should also consider that A&E may have changed their mind because of all the death threats they were receiving. A&E already knew long before the suspension that their decision was going to get a shit ton of blowback--which is exactly why the did it. As such, they also knew that they would eventually reinstate him, thus making it seem like they were sensitive to both sides of the issue. So no. A fear motive is just wishful thinking on your part.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Here's the bottom line:
He was suspended as a kneejerk reaction to what A&E thought would be market pressure to have him taken off, forgetting that the show appeals to a market segment that would be, at worst, indifferent to his comments. Being concerned that gays and urban liberals will stop watching duck dynasty is a little like fretting over Republicans boycotting Rachel Maddow. They were never and were never going to be the target audience in the first place.
They-and the gay lobbyists-also ignored that their star was an independently wealthy hillbilly that wasn't going to apologize for his beliefs. Nobody who lives the way that guy does is anything but in iconoclast.
And as far as advertisers go anyone advertising on duck dynasty has already figured out who the viewers are and whether they want to reach those viewers with their products. And again it isn't homosexuals or urban liberals
Poorly conceived suspension and poorly conceived boycott threat.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38 |
they probably realized that the people who were offended by Phil Robertson's remarks are people who read GQ mag, and not necessarily the people who actually watch Duck Dynasty. When they catered to the party that isn't really their audience, they offended the ones that are bringing them money.
Props go to GQ for trolling both sides and getting a lot of exposure and magazine sales out of it.
I always assume that people who actually read books and magazines are not easily offended, and (other than PC liberals trying to ban TOM SAWYER by Twain) I've never heard of a censorship drive rising from something in print. Only to something on television or video/broadcast news. A & E and Cracker Barrell (over-reacting to gay fringe group GLAAD) assumed that readers of GQ and Crackerbarrel shoppers would react the same way as GLAAD and gay secularists. It just demonstrates how little they bothered to understand the stars of their own show, and their audience. As I understand, there are gays who work at A & E who were offended by the remark and pushed for the suspension. Projecting their own liberal intolerance onto their conservative audience, who were rightly offended. A & E and Crackerbarrel were both lucky, that despite their offense, their conservative audience would rather have Duck Dynasty than stay mad at A & E. Just the same, I would have loved to see the Robertsons walk away from A & E, and take their hot property to another network.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38 |
It's ok, the gays at A&E will be collecting the big bucks while the fans will get some educational psa.
I do however recognize that conservative were willing to throw the bigger hissy fit with threats of boycotts and even murder. Oh yeah. MURDER! Who the fuck are you kidding, M E M?
- from Do Racists have lower IQ's...
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38 |
Boycotting is, after all, the subject at hand. Just because you applied a definition of "bitching" to it (in the case of conservatives alone), that doesn't mean you successfully shifted the focus.
GLAAD tried to use threats of boycotting to silence people. In response, conservatives used threats of boycotting to boost freedom of speech.
You lose again. Exactly. Despite M E M-spin otherwise, those are the facts.
- from Do Racists have lower IQ's...
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Oh, just ignore him, WB. The 'death threat' spin is just a variation on his 'all conservatives are violent gun clingers' fantasy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Where did GLAAD threaten a boycott over this? Plus we should also consider that A&E may have changed their mind because of all the death threats they were receiving. The death threats was reported on by ABC news and other news agencies. Are they part of some Duck Dynasty conspiracy? Perhaps it's inconvenient for your side to acknowledge death threats here but normally people take them seriously. Also I saw no reports about GLAAD actually threatening a boycott. If somebody can link to some evidence that they did it would be much appreciated.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
I don't think there will be any deal cutting at this point. How many sponsors want to chance more anus/vagina interviews after this?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Duck Dynasty star: Girls should carry a Bible, cook and marry ‘when they are 15′
By David Edwards
Sunday, December 29, 2013 15:25 EST
Recently uncovered video indicates that Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson may have fringe views — other than those on homosexuality and civil rights — that most Americans would find far outside the mainstream.
In a controversial interview with GQ that was published online this month, Robertson had compared homosexuality to bestiality and terrorism. He also said that African-Americans were happy during the Jim Crow-era.
The A&E network briefly suspended the reality TV star before bowing to pressure from fans and reinstating him only days later.
But some Americans could also be shocked to find out that Robertson believes that the age of 15 is the perfect time for girls to get married — as long as they can cook and carry a Bible.
At a Sportsmen’s Ministry talk in 2009, Robertson had some advice for a young man.
“Make sure that she can cook a meal, you need to eat some meals that she cooks, check that out,” he said. “Make sure she carries her Bible. That’ll save you a lot of trouble down the road. And if she picks your ducks, now, that’s a woman.”
“They got to where they’re getting hard to find,” Robertson remarked. “Mainly because these boys are waiting until they get to be about 20 years old before they marry ‘em. Look, you wait until they get to be 20 years old, the only picking that’s going to take place is your pocket.”
The Duck Commander company founder added: “You got to marry these girls when they are about 15 or 16, they’ll pick your ducks. You need to check with mom and dad about that of course.”
He went on to say that the Bible gave Americans the right to hunt.
And Robertson practices what he preaches. He began dating his wife, Kay, when she was only 14 and he was 18. They waited until Kay was 16 to get married.
Interesting.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 26,346 Likes: 38 |
That article would better be titled: RAW AND THE LEFT DESPERATELY TRY TO SMEAR POPULAR CONSERVATIVE DUCK DYNASTY STAR It's laughable how much your desperation is showing. I see this all the time, when RAW and Media Matters take comments that were clearly said with humor, and try to demonize conservatives by spinning them as being said in a completely serious context. Thinking that comments like this... “Make sure that she can cook a meal, you need to eat some meals that she cooks, check that out,” he said. “Make sure she carries her Bible. That’ll save you a lot of trouble down the road. And if she picks your ducks, now, that’s a woman.”
...were said with deadpan seriousness, just shows how humorless liberals truly are. Or Phil Robertson's vilified comments from his GQ interview on homosexuality: A woman has a vagina, the man has an anus. I'm sorry, but I just think the woman has a lot more to offer... If you can't see the clear humor in that, you truly are blind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Did he think it was a joke when he married his own wife when she was 16?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
...and they've been married how long now?
Seems whatever their relationship secret is, it works for them
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
WB wasn't disputing their happiness but was trying to say Robertson was joking. I don't think he was and I'm guessing you don't either.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
It's definitely tongue in cheek.
I'm sure he'd think society would be better off living the way he does (and has), but at the same time he thinks its too backwards to understand its virtues, thus making a scenario where people actually took his advice foreseeably less effective than it could be. In truth, it's rather satirical.
If people had the opportunity to get married at younger ages--and did--that would suggest a society that took marriage a lot more seriously than ours does at this point.
Last edited by Pariah; 2013-12-31 4:06 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Because you make the best decisions when your 15 or younger?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Again, the kids of yesteryear...perhaps I should say decade (even century) were miles more practical than modern day.
Right now, we're stuck with a poorly educated, lazy youth that lives in a shitty economy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Also, speaking for my own family, my paternal grandparents married when they were sixteen and seventeen. They stayed together their entire lives.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
It's a case of treating others like you want to be treated. If you want to say things that offend other people sometimes people will let you know their offended.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
They're threatening to kick him off a reality show for having an opinion....again. By your definition, that's intolerance.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
It's like being at work though. If I informed the fat coworker who stuffs his face that he's sinning I probably would lose my job. If the Catholic informed the Jew that they're going to hell they would lose their job. (or vice versa) Life isn't like a message board.
He's also getting paid to be there and agreed to certain terms.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Having an opinion does not equate to a verbal attack. You're not telling him--or the workplace incidents you presuppose--to cut down on insults, but rather to censor his views.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
If I talked about the sin of gluttony in front of a fat person at work, calling it an opinion wouldn't cut it with HR.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,884 Likes: 18
Son of Anarchist 15000+ posts
|
|
Son of Anarchist 15000+ posts
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,884 Likes: 18 |
that's actually pushing your beliefs regarding the sin of gluttony on the fat person.
the better analogy is if someone was asking you about your thoughts on gluttony and you voiced it out, and then the fat person overheard it and got offended.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Identifying intolerance elsewhere doesn't justify its practice anywhere else.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
that's actually pushing your beliefs on the fat person.
the better analogy is if someone was asking you about your thoughts on gluttony and you voiced it out, and then the fat person overheard it and got offended. Which is exactly the issue with Holyfield.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,884 Likes: 18
Son of Anarchist 15000+ posts
|
|
Son of Anarchist 15000+ posts
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,884 Likes: 18 |
yeah, I was pointing out that MEM's analogies do not apply to the holyfield issue. someone was specifically asking for his opinion and he gave it. nothing wrong with that (not the opinion, just the act of voicing it out when asked)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Didn't they just ask him if he knew of any gay boxers?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Sizzman said it would be good to have homosexual boxers. Holyfield responded in dissent. She initiated the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
It's a case of treating others like you want to be treated. If you want to say things that offend other people sometimes people will let you know their offended. The entire premise of homosexuality as "civil right" is that people are born that way and suffer because it it. essentially the analogy that Holyfield drew is exactly the argument that gays use to justify preferential treatment.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Sizzman said it would be good to have homosexual boxers. Holyfield responded in dissent. She initiated the conversation. So we can agree that she didn't actually ask him about his views? She made a comment and he responded. Keep in mind this is Celebrity Big Brother btw. He signed up for this.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
So we can agree that she didn't actually ask him about his views? She made a comment and he responded. Keep in mind this is Celebrity Big Brother btw. He signed up for this. She volunteered her own opinions without provocation and, therefore, he's not allowed to volunteer his unless they're simpatico with hers? Sounds like the very definition of intolerance and double standards to me. I doubt Celebrity Big Brother included that stipulation in his contract.
Last edited by Pariah; 2014-01-07 2:34 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
It's ironic. In the field of criminal law and constitutional law in regards to confessions liberals have long recognized the concept that somebody's statements can be elicited without a direct question. Instead, the issue is whether a statement is reasonably likely to elect a response from the other party.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
So you think when she made her statement she was actually asking him what his views on homosexuality were?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
I also mention again this is Celebrity Big Brother. Actual celebrities usually know better than to be on it.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
So you think when she made her statement she was actually asking him what his views on homosexuality were? As noted above, when someone makes a statement that is reasonably likely to elicit a response, you can't pretend to be suprised when they actually respond. As to your other points, as you note, this is "Celebrity Big Brother." Again, the whole point of these shows is to have people act in ways that are interesting or controversial. If someone says something short of a direct threat why would you "fire" them?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
So you think when she made her statement she was actually asking him what his views on homosexuality were? I realize you're going to cling onto this tune for dear life now, but the more you ignore the fact that she engaged him in conversation, the more you imply that the forum she created--which the show apparently had no problem with--was only open and tolerant towards certain views. We understand that you're intolerant. No need to stress the point.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Don't forget disabled!  You'll note that a just a couple of posts ago ... ... She made a comment and he responded. I'm just saying she didn't ask him for his views from what I've read.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
She volunteered her own opinions without provocation and, therefore, he's not allowed to volunteer his unless they're simpatico with hers?
Sounds like the very definition of intolerance and double standards to me. I doubt Celebrity Big Brother included that stipulation in his contract.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,201 Likes: 80 |
Sorry I don't own Celebrity Big Brother. What they allow is up to them, correct?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
