Open Forum Friday: Is Bruno Helping or Hurting Gay Rights?
With Bruno hitting theatres this weekend, I’m expecting to hear a continued debate over whether or not Sacha Baron Cohen’s strategy of ambushing and misleading victims is ethical. However, what seems to be an even bigger discussion growing out of the film is whether or not this movie will help or hinder the gay rights movement. Clearly in the wake of the Prop 8 vote against gay marriage, this is something that is still a very touchy subject in America. But is Sacha Baron Cohen intending to poke fun at homophobia, or is he just making people laugh by playing up gay stereotypes? Or both?
I should note that I have yet to see the film myself, but as people go out and see it this weekend, I am interested to hear opinions on the matter. A lot of the critical praise for Borat stemmed from the satirical nature of the film, and how he managed to tear down a lot of traditional American values and general closed-mindedness that he encountered. Bruno seems to be less interested in politics and more interested in shock value, although as always, I’m sure that what people get out of the movie will be largely dependent on what they bring in. Even if he does have good intentions, there’s no guarantee that the movie will achieve the desired effect. So what do you think… is Sacha Baron Cohen a clever satirist, or is he just going for a cheap laugh? Will Bruno change people’s views on the gay community, or will it just make for an even greater divide between the right and left wing? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.
Comments (63)
Who really gives a rat’s ass if anyone is “offended”?
Posted by Bob on July 10th, 2009Cohen’s comedy is intentionally offensive. Every group in the universe has stereotypes. If you can’t laugh at yourself, you might as well jump in front of a bus.
COMEDY isn’t meant to be taken seriously. Take a break from the politically correctness that is permeating this country.
I just saw the movie. It’s harmless.
Posted by bickle on July 10th, 2009Some of these jokes would have worked even if the main character wasn’t gay.
They could have just as easily been Ali G.
Well … what did Borat do for international relations? This is this guy’s gimmic and for some reason people eat it up each time like even though the formula hasn’t really changed just the outfits. He’s the comedian equivalent of Barbie.
Posted by Ian on July 10th, 2009I wish I had an opinion. I’ll have to wait and see what everyone else says and agree.
Maybe if I saw the film…..
Out of the three characters I always thought Bruno was the weakest as in he just wasn’t as funny as the other two. I was surprised that people thought he deserved a feature when I always viewed him as filler on the tv show. Ho hum.
Posted by sitromdrol on July 10th, 2009Theres an article on NOW Toronto about Bruno from a lesbian activist saying that the movie is a godsend for gay people, in a good way.
I tend to agree with that the AV Club said on their podcast today, that he’s a cartoon, but he’s not just a gay cartoon, its equally a part of the fashion industry as well as having a dash of modern (real or stereotypical) European insensitivity towards other peoples feelings.
Posted by Goon on July 10th, 2009I agree with bob. who cares?
Posted by Rick on July 10th, 2009I don’t think the film will hurt the gay rights movement. Bruno is such an over the top stereotype that I don’t think anyone’s really going to see it a reflective of the group as a whole. I think that more subtle stereotypes like Will & Grace and Queer Eye for the Strait Guy are a lot more insideous.
Posted by MJS on July 10th, 2009@ lot of the critical praise for Borat stemmed from the satirical nature of the film, and how he managed to tear down a lot of traditional American values and general closed-mindedness that he encountered.
I always thought Borat was over rated in that sense. I’m not saying the movie wasn’t funny, but it’s a mean spirited sort of humor that’s about exploiting peoples good will and politeness.
I didn’t think Borat was exposing peoples prejudice (well… that frat boys) I felt bad for his victims.
Posted by Rusty James on July 10th, 2009I haven’t seen the film yet but I felt the need to comment to some degree.
I don’t know if Cohen is trying to “prove” a point. I think he is just trying to be funny. Its funny to rile up people, make them uncomfortable and get them angry over things that they can’t control or don’t effect them. Southern (generalizing here) people in America are the worst in this regards when it comes to homosexuals. Many flat out hate gays. Why? Because they find it “disgusting” and “disagree” with it. Im sure there are other reasons. So what are their ways of dealing with it? Do they ignore the people? No. They try to ridicule and make their lives a living hell.
There was a good article about the small southern town where a portion of the film takes place. They focused on two gay lovers who live there and while they didn’t get too indepth (or as indepth as horrible human beings in this place should be exposed), their encounters living there sounded terrible. And they live there, having to deal with it every day.
There are places in this country were different types of people are accepted. Im curious, does the film mention this?
One thing I noticed after Borat, while talking to people from other countries, was they were under the impression that everyone in America was a bigot hateful person.
Posted by Captain N on July 10th, 2009Hey Cap, not sure i appreciate your negative view point’s twords Southern america, which are known for thier hospitality. Just because you don’t approve, or promote the gay agenda, it does not make you a bigot, or hateful. dislike the behavior, not the individual.
Posted by Rick on July 10th, 2009@ “Just because you don’t approve, or promote the gay agenda, it does not make you a bigot, or hateful. dislike the behavior, not the individual.”
Yes, it does. That’s like hearing a white dude from the 50’s say “I don’t hate black people, I just don’t want them to have equel rights”
Posted by MJS on July 11th, 2009Is acting like an obnoxious douchebag really the best way to “expose predjudice?”
Come on.. if I go over to Europe and start acting like a stereotypical loud boorish American and everyone gets pissed off and insults me, does that mean all Europeans are hateful and prejudice against me just because I am American?
Look at the ridiculous stunts Bruno is pulling on people.. of COURSE people are going to get pissed off at someone being so over the top and obnoxious. I doubt a lesbian couple (or practically anyone) would appreciate some guy coming up and sticking his crotch in their faces, so I guess that makes them hetero-phobes, according to that line of reasoning.
The few times I’ve seen Bruno on the old Ali G, I remember it being more about mocking the fashion industry for it’s vapid ways than it was about mocking American prejudice yet again (as if the rest of the world is so incredibly enlighted compared to us) For example he would interview people and get them to totally contradict themselves about their own work within the span of a few sentences. That was funny, whereas “exposing” a bunch of good old boy rednecks as anti-gays is neither orginal or clever or hardly suprising. How hard is it to illicit a negative response from a person like that when you are straight out of a gay pride parade?
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 11th, 2009I think he’s a real life gay.
Posted by Tomas on July 11th, 2009oh god Tomas, I suppose Sean Penn is too then right? Play a gay, be a gay? He’s engaged to Isla Fisher. I suggest you do a google search and bite your knuckle at the results.
First off, what MJS said.
Secondly
“Is acting like an obnoxious douchebag really the best way to “expose predjudice?—
In some cases yes. First off, have you actually seen the movie? And you seem to forget the couple of times he did this sort of thing on the show, also in Alabama.
Sometimes Bruno exists to mock Hollywood, the fashion industry, reality television and what everyone will do to be famous, and Bruno mostly doesnt exist to provoke so much as allow other people to show how ridiculous they are. When stuff like this happens in the movie and on the show (movie example: the Hollywood parents), it’s funny.
As for the actual truly gay stuff – sometimes its funny, sometimes its not. Sometimes yes, SBC is a bit desperate and aggressive in getting a reaction with the character and is being a douchebag. Sometimes SBC is doing nothing at all but talking with an accent and just existing as a gay person and it makes people go off worse than if he was confronting him with it. Remember the guy who ran the rodeo in Borat who went off… ON HIS OWN… about wanting to stop Jews and kill gay people? The way that plays, there’s no amount of editing that can excuse that guy.
More than anything, he’s just showing discomfort in general. The number one bias is towards funny, and I’m sure there’s some satiric agenda and desire to confront homophobic behavior with varying degrees of a gay stereotype.
Much of the logic behind that, both with Borat, Ali G AND Bruno, is that the characters ARE such stupid people that it is also showing what other people believe is the norm or can actually exist. Part of the humor I hope you see, is that so many people will put up with them and their stupidity and not even call them on it, because that stereotype either exists or at least exists in the interviewee/prankee’s own head. or like the Tom Green Show, they’re so distracted by being on camera they don’t know how to deal with anything.
SBC puts their biggest stereotype of a foreigner in front of them, or their biggest stereotype of a gay person they’d fear in front of them, or in Ali G a straight up dumb person of somewhat indiscernable race in front of them, and the reaction is funny becuase its so different person to person. Some get angry, some run, Some say nothing and bite their lip, some will see through it (those obviously get cut
) and yes, some will expose their true prejudice.
And it’s for all these reasons that I love SBC. It never comes down to “yeah, get those rednecks! That’ll show em!”
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009oh god Tomas, I suppose Sean Penn is too then right? Play a gay, be a gay? He’s engaged to Isla Fisher. I suggest you do a google search and bite your knuckle at the results.Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009
What does that prove? Lots of gay men hide under the pretense of marriage. He’s queer and you know it. You just don’t want to accept his as your own.
Posted by Tomas on July 11th, 2009oh one other thing, to answer your question:
“Come on.. if I go over to Europe and start acting like a stereotypical loud boorish American and everyone gets pissed off and insults me, does that mean all Europeans are hateful and prejudice against me just because I am American?”
It will depend on the context, but depending on how you perform that character and what you say and what situations you put yourself into, yes, absolutely, you could very much show European prejudice, or at least ignorance.
If I were doing the character, the kind of stereotype I’d push is for him to be mildly overweight, slobby, with some cheesy eagle or USA material, not necessarily redneck or southern accented – go for the Middle America type instead. And with the Europeans, I’d basically be Homer Simpson, in that I’d act really stupid, but I’d also talk about having a huge house and being really successful and being so out for number one to a ridiculous degree. You have to put things out there that can absolutely exist with some people, but make them think you’re the norm, the average american, and that is what will show prejudice, if that’s your intent.
Here in Canada there was a show called “Talking to Americans” where a guy went to the states and got people to congratulate us on camera for finally getting electricity, that sort of thing. There were a couple cases where it showed some American resentment or prejudice against Canadians (which does exist with some people) but mostly it was just for a laugh to show that Americans have absolutely no idea about anything Canadian, and have such stereotypes of us as a cold wilderness that they could actually believe our capital building was an igloo.
Point being, I think you could do with this an American character in Europe or elsewhere. But recognize it would be harder, because the world generaly pays more attention to the US and its culture than vice versa.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009“What does that prove? Lots of gay men hide under the pretense of marriage. He’s queer and you know it. You just don’t want to accept his as your own.”
You’re being awfully assumptuous with no evidence other than the assumption that ‘acting gay equals gay’. And your latter statement “accept his as your own” seems to assume I’m gay too. Because I defend gay rights?
And I say straight up you should apologize. And not because I think being gay is anything to apologize for. But because you made that assumption about me for absolutely no good reason.
Unless of course your intention is to derail the thread from true discussion.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009“Just because you don’t approve, or promote the gay agenda…”
Sigh….There is no gay agenda.
Posted by swarez on July 11th, 2009And Tomas, so what if he’s gay (he’s not). Then what?
O.k. I’m going to jump in…when do gay men think it is rape, when someone is drunk… JUST KIDDING, GOODBYE
Posted by rus in chicago on July 11th, 2009Goon, you’re awfully motivated, aren’t you? Why is that?
Anyway, the movie should be as good as Borat, which I somewhat enjoyed. (especially the deleted scenes)
Swarez, I personally do not care either way, but will call a spade a spade and not apologize for it.
Posted by Tomas on July 11th, 2009“Goon, you’re awfully motivated, aren’t you? Why is that?”
Because I believe in equal rights, strongly. The fact that I know a number of gay people and my sister happens to be gay helps, but I held these beliefs long before that. As it happens with my sister, anyone who is so unreasonably standing in the way of her happiness is someone I have a problem with.
“call a spade a spade”
if you’re referring to me, then you’re just plain being a jerk. By your standards its okay for me to call you gay because you’re in military and thus chose to be around men all the time.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009Not sure if I’ll see Bruno.. I’m suffering from a general case of burnout over the same old social issues such as racism or gay rights or how terrible Christians are. This country already obsesses over that stuff 24/7. I think his schtick is running its course.
There are much better causes out there than trying making regular folks just living their lives out to look like idiots. He’s supposed to be Austrian, right? so why doesn’t he spend time traveling through Europe pulling pranks on Neo Nazis or the Russian military or British Royalty. Seems like he has a thing against America, despite the fact that most of his money is made off the people he mocks.
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 11th, 2009“Seems like he has a thing against America, despite the fact that most of his money is made off the people he mocks.”
He started doing his schtick by pulling pranks on British society on British TV.
He’s only doing America now because that’s where the widest audience is.
Posted by MJS on July 11th, 2009@ I’m suffering from a general case of burnout over the same old social issues such as racism or gay rights or how terrible Christians are
While at the same time, anyone who feels insulted by Bruno or Minstrel Robot is a “pc liberal nazi”. Do you understand how that appears rather hypocritical?
Posted by Rusty James on July 11th, 2009Wow.
I mean WOW.
That was intense. Might be because I’m high.
You anti gay people are so wierd.
Posted by sitromdrol on July 11th, 2009Thought I forgot to put anti in that sentence.
Paranoid.
Posted by sitromdrol on July 11th, 2009“He’s only doing America now because that’s where the widest audience is.”
and becuase theres so many pockets in America where he’d be completely unrecognized, whereas in Britain he’d be spotted right away. Tom Green had the same problem, could only follow up his shtick with that Japan special.
I will admit that if SBC wants to do any more of this stuff, he should maybe go back to TV, maybe HBO again, with some new characters with different purposes. As much as I’m annoyed with how people get burnt out with comedians, I can see why it happens when you keep going back to the same well.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009My sister saw it, same take as mine. Funny, but not as good as Borat and could have had more of a plot to hold it together.
but you know, the more I think about it and describe certain scenes to people, the more I appreciate it. But I still have to say the sum of its parts are better than its whole.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009“so why doesn’t he spend time traveling through Europe pulling pranks on Neo Nazis”
For the Nazi thing – Bruno actually is somewhat of a Nazi and praises Hitler as misunderstood throughout the film. Though on the UK or US TV show I believe he did confront some neo Nazis at some point.
as for ‘why doesnt he go somewhere else’:
Part of the film is actually in the Middle East of his character trying to bridge peace between Israelis and Palistineans. He walks through the most conservative Jewish sector of Jerusalem in a fashioned up Hasidic Rabbi outfit and gets chased. He goes to an actual terrorist in Lebanon and tries to get kidnapped. And of course the start of the film is him messing up fashion shows and making a lot of designers look stupid, and of course all of this is happening in urban centres/Hollywood/Europe.
So you’re kind of arguing from ignorance
Give some props, even if he’s probably a liberal the dude has balls, and you can’t come tell me that he ONLY picks on the bastions of conservative america. You should see the stuff he did against showbiz parents.
In the finale of the movie (SPOILER) Bruno has set up an MMA type deal, where Bruno had converted to being straight and was acting like a macho guy, but a gay character in teh film confronts him in the ring and they kiss. The crowd goes absolutely apeshit and trashes them and even tries to assault them with a steel chair. Even though they eventually took the kissing a little further, before it had even gotten anywhere near that level in the cage, the crowd were completely showing their own prejudice in several ways I wont spoil. So for all the complaining that the character is an asshole or this or that, there are a whole lot of other cases where all he has had to do is show the slightest iota of being gay and it has turned into a near riot.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009>>While at the same time, anyone who feels insulted by Bruno or Minstrel Robot is a “pc liberal naziâ€. Do you understand how that appears rather hypocritical?
When did I call someone a pc liberal nazi? Please point me to where I said that. You may find it hard to believe, but certain social issue driven movies are not high on my list of priorities.
For example, despite being an athiest, I have no interest in seeing a movie attacking religion such as Religulous. That’s partly because I don’t trust a guy like Bill Maher to treat the issue fairly based on what I’ve seen on Politically Incorrect, but mainly because the subject doesn’t appeal to me.
Likewise, Bruno doesn’t seem worth watching to me IF it were to spend most of the time trying to make Americans look homophobic. One or two gags, ok.. but not a whole movie.
But hey, if you happen to be insulted by Bruno or Minstrel robots or whatver more power to you – welcome to America. You can feel insulted about anything that strikes your fancy. Don’t confuse being “offended by” with being “uninterested in”
While on the subject, pretty much everything film makers do illicts an outrage from somebody somewhere. Certain Jews were offended over Passion of the Christ, Mayans over Apocalypto, Italians over gangster movies, Indians over Slumdog etc .
I guess I should be offended that Vikings are rarely portrayed in a positive light. Surely not all of my ancestors went around hacking people to death.. it’s just so unfair we are portrayed as savages. Where is the Viking Anti-Defamation League
Anyway – Goon.. yes some sequences are not in America, but are you telling me that 80 percent or more of the time that Bruno and Borat appear onscreen it’s not in the US? I’ll take your word on the Bruno film.
>> Give some props, even if he’s probably a liberal the dude has balls, and you can’t come tell me that he ONLY picks on the bastions of conservative america. You should see the stuff he did against showbiz parents.
I’m not “against” someone who is liberal per se.. I’m against the same old social agenda driven entertainment as I said above, unless that agenda is that “all zombies must be destroyed”
You bring up segments of the film that sound actually funny. Since I haven’t seen it yet I was going off the impressions given by the trailer – the basic training bit, the camping trip bit, the 2 dildos bit, etc as well as his stunt on MTV with Eminem. From seeing them I got the impression that 80 percent of the movie was Bruno trying to get people to reveal anti-gay opinions which, as I said before, I find less entertaining than him lampooning other assorted but less covered subjects.
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 11th, 2009I couldnt give you an approximate breakdown of where he is or who he’s going after.. a lot is in Hollywood, some is in Alabama, some is in the Middle East, and one segment is in Texas where he offends an all black Springer type show audience. I believe a little is Europe.
But yeah, its mostly in America, the plot (what little there is) is that he’s the star of a big European fashion show but he screws up large, and so he tries to get revenge by becoming a big star in Hollywood. When that doesnt work out he tries to find other outlets to be famous – ie. getting kidnapped by terrorists and being on the news, getting in a sex tape with a major celebrity. I think it would be overblowing it to say that the satire is really about what people will do to be famous, but its definitely as strong a theme as any of the gay panic theme.
If you want to see a movie making fun of European stereotypes, rent Eurotrip. Its actually not bad. Better than I thought it’d be.
If you do see it, I agree with Bruno that it is not as gay as the film dropped in no. 10 of Letterman’s top ten list on Thursday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UJDKRzE6fQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wwtdd.com%2F&feature=player_embedded
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009Warning and spoiler though if you care…
and if it bugs you as much as it apparently bugs Tim1974 and his pseudonyms in the Hangover thread…
il y a de cock. a big one. that talks for a second.
but also a dominatrix completely whipping the shit out of SBC. whether the dom was hired by him to be there/set up or not, he gets it pretty bad. that was good.
Seriously though, while there’s more going on that I have listed, dont let me try to tell you that there isn’t any of what you expect. there is no shortage of ‘gay guy getting straight people to be creeped out’ . Sometimes its some of the best material, and sometimes its the weakest: it all comes down to the reactions, they’re all their own particular case.
one group of hunters doesnt attack him or do anything mean – they just stare off into space stoic and the camera just stays on them as they are scared to move or do anything. the hunters in that scene dont really do anything wrong at all and dont (to me) look like jackasses or bad people at all, but their discomfort and reaction really truly is funny. and thats my ultimate bias – the funny. on the opposite end theres a scene with Ron Paul where they get Paul to call him a ‘queer’ that doesnt go down so well. I mean, he got the kind of footage from it he can’t just throw away, but at the same time its the ultimate example of forcing someone to get the reaction you want to get.
bottom line – if you liked Borat, even if you’re sick of certain things being covered, its varied enough to give a chance, and i think most people, even actual homophobes, will find things to laugh at on the same level that was intended by SBC.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009“Where is the Viking Anti-Defamation League”
In black metal bands, burning down churches in retaliation. A few of them rock pretty hard. Nagy and I do enjoy the Gorgoroth.
There are valid reasons for people to be offended, and other times where they take it to far, either as a group or individually. I mean recently even though I’ve actually done work for an ultra-feminist magazine (Bitch), I was vastly at odds with certain feminist reactions to Observe and Report. As well a friend of Jay and I from high school have been in arguments about porn. There are reasonable disagreements and where people draw the line of what is appropriate, and there are people who read into things only what they want to see. I know its a tough call sometimes, which is why I try to see each case as its own thing rather than write off anything with a broad brush because I’m part of de facto Team A or B or whatever. I mean as stated I find gay rights to be very important, and family wise I have a dog in that fight, but I still absolutely reserve the right to laugh at Family Guy’s base lowest common denominator gay jokes.
I mean I quite enjoy a lot of politically incorrect humor and/or behavior, but at the same time I get annoyed at people who complain about political correctness being out there in general, as if its a universally horrible thing that is unreasonable in any situation/workplace/setting. I always thought Carlin was overrated, but when he gets on about people and language and people’s lack of context, I am completely on board.
So with that in mind, bias is a funny thing, and unpredictable. But I know that even though I’m a mean ol’ atheist, I can get dusty at the end of Millions (yeah, laugh
) and put up with a lot of religion in dramas, etc. I guess from my point of view, if I can put up with that stuff being so prevalent in culture, I expect a bit more slack from other people when there’s going to be cocks on screen or when Cultural Group X gets treated with more respect than you think they deserve.
So Ape, I understand what you mean if you say you’re just ‘not interested’ in something covering social issues, or are burnt out. I understand the seperation between ‘burnt out’ and just plain aversion. I haven’t watched the news much since the election because that season was so rough and bitter that I just plain needed a break from it. And besides, if someone handed me an Indigo Girls CD and I said its “not for me” that doesnt mean anything more to me than that I dont want to listen to lousy music and has nothing to do with its message.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009I just saw Bruno this evening.. I thought it was extremely funny and I enjoy Sacha’s films because they are real scenario’s without actors however I do not think that a positive reaction towards gays was produced by this film.. I actually heard a lot of gay bashing jokes.. As we were leaving the theatre 3 young boys (probably early 20’s) were talking.. One of them said I didn’t have a problem with gay people before this movie but I don’t want them to be anywhere near me now.. Another went on to even say he was staying out of public restrooms from now on.. I didn’t get what that meant.. Some even shouted horrible things during the movie through some of the homosexual sex scene’s. I was laughing aloud with everyone else at the wrestling scene when he called himself straight and then started kissing his opponent and taking there clothes off.. It was really funny at first but when the spectators in the movie starting shouting horrible hateful words against gays and threatening to kill them it didn’t seem so funny anymore.. It felt really hateful and scary. I guess if you go to a wrestling match in Texas of all places with a bunch of straight men that want to see barbaric fighting and pull something like that you have to expect that kind of reaction.. Still all in all it was upsetting as a humanist and a gay woman to witness that kind of hate.. I guess you have to go into this movie with an open mind.. His portrayal of gay men is highly exaggerated unfortunately uncultured or sheltered people will leave with an entirely different interpretation of gays..
Posted by Mallory on July 12th, 2009>>In black metal bands, burning down churches in retaliation. A few of them rock pretty hard. Nagy and I do enjoy the Gorgoroth
Ha Ha.. saw that on that great Metal documentary. crazy stuff.. I will be thinking of you guys along with my Viking brethren next time I crank up some old Celtic Frost (even though they are Swiss) that old shit like Dethroned Emperor or Circle of the Tyrants always feelt extra Vikingish to me.. hell even “Immigrant Song” gets me going..
Speaking of Nagy.. MORE please… Tell the triplets to ignore the haters and give him a regular guest spot, if nothing else reviewing classic Barbarian tit movies.
>>I try to see each case as its own thing rather than write off anything with a broad brush because I’m part of de facto Team A or B or whatever.
Sure.. I agree completely. That’s sorta my point – I don’t want to be preached to in a movie about most anything. I don’t like seeing poltical statements disguised as movies. If politics or sensitive issues happen to come into it naturally, that’s fine so long as it isn’t jammed down my throat at the expense of telling a good story. That’s why I won’t see films like Rendition or Lions for Lambs, but I would go see a film like Hurt Locker.
A film like Apacalypto is a great example I think because it’s truthful to it’s genre – It’s a non-stop chase/action flick first and foremost. Gibson doesn’t get caught up in heavy handed exposition about indiginous cultures and Western Man’s destruction of them. Yes.. that is implied at the end when Jaguar Paw sees the Spanish ships, but we don’t get numerous cliched idealized scenes of the “peaceful” wise indians before they are corrupted by evil whites. Another good example of that is Black Robe, a lesser known film about a Jesuit missonary traveling with Algonquin Indians. The film neither demonizes or idolizes anyone. It’s a great smaller film for people to check out. Highly recommended!
That same pet peeve I have is part of why I was really put off at the district 9 trailers – it came across more like a contrived anti-apartheid anti Gitmo movie dressed up as a sci-fi story than a truthful story about how mankind would likely deal with extra-terrestrial contact. Our first encounter with non-humans and they are forced into slums? Please. I just cant buy that in the least. If you want to make a film about how racist people are, at least keep it in the confines of plausability. I guess the fact that every Western nation on Earth especially the US or Russia would be fighting to get ahold of their technology and would do ANYTHING to harbor/examine the ship and the aliens is too inconvient a point to accept when one has more important socially injustice commentary to depict. At the end of the day I have ask myself, Do I really want to go out and pay money to get lectured to about the filmmaker’s politics be they pro-war or anti-war or pro religion or anti religion etc?
Yea Yea.. trailers can be misleading.. I know that. Perhaps as you said Bruno isn’t all about gayness and District isn’t a bad Next Generation episode. It’s getting so hard to trust trailers anyway..
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 12th, 2009if you’re referring to me, then you’re just plain being a jerk. By your standards its okay for me to call you gay because you’re in military and thus chose to be around men all the time.
Posted by Goon on July 11th, 2009
Ya, you got me….argh! Right to the heart. How will I recover? XD
Seriously though, we should have our own no holds barred pod cast.
Posted by Tomas on July 12th, 2009Naw Baychuk, more people would probably rather hear Henrik and I finally murder each other on tape.
“I don’t like seeing poltical statements disguised as movies.”
Well, I dont see that in District 9, maybe theres overtones but I dont think its blatant at all. But as for political statements ‘disguised’, again, to me it depends. I can put up with Moore’s movies so easily because he wears it on his sleeve going in, its documenting his point of view if nothing else, and he does everything he can to make it entertaining, and that latter point is hardly up for debate.
But as it goes for regular ‘fictional’ movies with some political overtones, whether its blatant (Bob Roberts) or ridiculously subtle (the people who think 300 and Dark Knight are saying something), it again to me is a case by case basis. Bob Roberts is a blatantly political movie, and I love that whereas the politics and message in Crash are so hamhandedly done and eye rollingly ironic that it drives me up the wall.
Posted by Goon on July 12th, 2009as for the viking metal Ape, to me lately its all about Enslaved. And whats weird is that they’re getting more and more accessible and still so obviously a metal band. Not an easy thing to pull off.
You could also check out Tyr for maybe the most blatantly viking stuff – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I1geB7U5VI
Posted by Goon on July 12th, 2009Ape,
I shouldn’t lump you in with others around here who are quick to throw around the “pc liberal” name calling. I was generalizing while addressing you specifically. I’ll stop doing that.
However in other threads around here you’ve been quick to dismiss other people offended by racist humor, insisted gays are never portrayed in a negative light in the media, and made some pretty inflamatory remarks about blacks.
I find this pairing of indifference towards others all the while being accutely sensitive to slights against yourself to be appalling.
#
People need to get a grip.. if anything, media generally bends over backward to avoid depicting blacks, mexicans, gays etc in anything but a sparkling light. When was the last time anyone saw a sitcom with a black or mexican thug/robber/gangbanger commiting a crime? In sit-com world only generic white guys commit crimes.
Posted by Damndirtyape on June 26th, 2009
#
??? Are you fucking kidding me? You’ve alluded to working in the industry. You must know a few young black men trying to make it as actors. What do they think about this statement? What kind of parts are they auditioning for?
Posted by Rusty James on July 12th, 2009“Do I really want to go out and pay money to get lectured to about the filmmaker’s politics be they pro-war or anti-war or pro religion or anti religion etc?”
Maybe not but sometimes you go out to see things that are in-line with how you see the world. Honestly I think the whole debate about District 9 is wearing thin. I mean, at the end of the day it’s a sci-fi movie about aliens on Earth. Neill Blomkamp was born in South Africa and set his movie there, and it just so happens South Africa has a rather sordid history attached to it. It also happens to not have many movies set in it, so the location alone will be a nice change from the glaring urban wastelands and arid deserts of Revenge of the Fallen.
Even Moon is more about telling a good character story within a science fiction setting than it is asking you to question the ethics of spoiler spoiler spoiler blah blah blah go see this fucking movie if you can. Certain movies cram their politics right down your throat, but the majority of people going to see them know exactly what they are getting. The fact that you leave comments on a movie website indicates you’re probably a little bit more informed that the average film goer. It’s entirely your right to pick and choose what you want to see and when you want to see it. But sometimes you see shadows where there aren’t any and sometimes you only see the world the way you want to see it.
Not every film has an agenda, even if it make look like it does.
“more people would probably rather hear Henrik and I finally murder each other on tape.”
I would pay to hear this. Seriously, set up a paypal account and book that shit.
Posted by Dave on July 12th, 2009even if it may*. Ugh when are blog interfaces going to catch up with the rest of the Editing Age?
Posted by Dave on July 12th, 2009I haven’t seen Bruno, but this:
http://imgur.com/uIcbU.gif
is probably offensive to some but I think it’s hysterical. Is Bruno like this?
Posted by Dave on July 12th, 2009>>> ??? Are you fucking kidding me? You’ve alluded to working in the industry. You must know a few young black men trying to make it as actors. What do they think about this statement? What kind of parts are they auditioning for?
LOL I work in pre-production.. Has nothing to do with black actors or acting.
Did you not notice my JOKE about feeling slighted as a Scandinavian (“Viking Anti-Defamation League) lol.. But hey since I’m a straight white male no one is going to come running to my defense even if I was actually offended, right? Or will you be there to defend my right to be offended?
The reason I’m quick to “make a fuss” as it were when I’m accused of being racist or a homophobe or whatever by strangers on the internet is because I know how the name game works. Those terms typically carry a special meaning to most people and are usually effective in shutting down people and trying to silence them. Basically the implication is person X = “racist” so I don’t have to listen to or respond to what X says and person X is supposed to go run away and hide in shame for being accused by the wise and enlightened accuser.
Sure, I will readily admit to being opinionated or coarse from time to time, but I try to call it like I see it. As does everyone else on this board. I wasn’t horribly offended by it though – I’ve been called worse.
Incidently, I stand by what I said 100 percent about how PC and watered down sitcoms and TV in general is. The only real response Goon came up with to that was the Seinfeld reference which itself was a joke inside the confines of the show. That whole thing is not worth getting into a long discussion over, but I’ve had it several times with my friends and we all agree on it so it’s not like I’m the only person who has noticed it.
>> Not every film has an agenda, even if it may look like it does.
Yes I know. That’s why I listed a few films that I liked which were more concerned with good storytelling than moralizing even though the subject was a perfect setting for it. The director resisted the temptation and I appreciated it.
>> But sometimes you see shadows where there aren’t any and sometimes you only see the world the way you want to see it.
Good point, but that works both ways. I think that PERFECTLY applies to my discussion with Rusty. If you look for racism and homophobia etc. at every turn, then you can convince yourself of it as often as you want.
As for D9 – I’m not about to condemn it fully since I haven’t seen it. I was just talking about my own personal distaste for the premise and trailer. It may be a kick ass film – I hope it does well since if nothing else I want to see sci-fi with fresh voices succeed. I love science fiction, it’s my favorite genre, but something about this project just struck me the wrong way after seeing the early trailers.
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 12th, 2009@ LOL I work in pre-production.. Has nothing to do with black actors or acting.
Yeah sure, but presumably if you’re working in the industry and living in LA … whatever
@ If you look for racism and homophobia etc. at every turn, then you can convince yourself of it as often as you want.
And let me throw back to you; would you be so quick to dismiss insults against white christian scandinavian [whatever else] as people just looking to be offended at every turn?
Personally I believe that people are often overly sensitive and also sometimes there are legitimately offensive messages in media. And of course no two people agree on exactly what is “legitimate” so we discuss it. Or at least we try to until the inevitable stooge stumbles in calls everyone a left wing PC nazi.
You don’t seem to understand what I’m criticizing you for. I don’t think anyone here’s ever blamed you for being opinionated or course, that’s kind of our style. Neither do I fault you for being touchy about someone calling you racist unfairly. You should stand up for yourself and make your points.
And also I call some of your statements in that Transformer thread as racist. I’ll also stand up for myself and make my points.
Posted by Rusty James on July 12th, 2009>> And let me throw back to you; would you be so quick to dismiss insults against white christian scandinavian [whatever else] as people just looking to be offended at every turn?
As a white heterosexual male I’m used to being blamed for pretty much everything. I remember sitting in classes in college while some teachers and certain students railed about how dead white males have ruined the world essentially. The irony is that in LA I’m a minority.. but in keeping with the “official rules” of identity politics that doesn’t matter since I originally came from the “ruling class” majority.
And yes.. if I ever did meet a white guy complaining for real that Vikings are always portrayed in a negative way I’d laugh my ass off…
>>And also I call some of your statements in that Transformer thread as racist.
Aside from being social “hot button” words, they are nebulous, subjective words I think ..as far as racism in Transformers, if one takes into account a hypothetical situation like Flavor Flav doing the voice over work, or if he expressly asked Bay to model the characters after his persona, would that then be racist? What if Bay was a black director? Would it be racist then?
Same thing with Bruno.. if SBC was actually gay (Which I don’t think he is) would it change the context of the debate?
Not sure how we ended up on this tangent, since my original post about Bruno here was less about debating if Bruno was good or bad for the gay cause than it was expressing surprise that people were shocked that openly gay behavior was not appreciated in a context like an MMA fight. DUH!
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 12th, 2009@ As a white heterosexual male I’m used to being blamed for pretty much everything. I remember sitting in classes in college…
Blah blah blah some made up story probably cut and pasted from a chain email… so in other words, no you are not so quick to dismiss percieved slights against your side.
Your persecution complex, totally valid. All those minorities, they’re just faking it for attention. They’re all overly sensitive, you’re the correct amount of sensitive.
I’d like to visit this alternate reality that all conservatives live in where every single person is hounded by liberal college professors, ACLU lawyers and uppity NAACP reps blaming them for slavery. I imagine it’d turn me into a total douche as well.
In answer to your hypotheticals. I think both those conditions would make a difference. I think context is very important in these situations. But I don’t necessarily think those conditions would be the deciding factor necessarily.
Pointing to the black guy laughing doesn’t mean your joke about OJ Simpson being Obama’s father wasn’t racist.
I agree about “racism” being a “nebulous and subjective” word. Ordinarily I don’t like to use it, unfortunately sometimes there’s no good alternative. I ridiculous that we use the same word for grama’s anachronistic comments about “the negroes” that we use to refer to skin heads and klansman.
I don’t think you’re a terrible person or anything. But you made some comments in that other thread that lead me to believe that you have some negative and ignorant attitudes black people.
@ my original post about Bruno here was less about debating if Bruno was good or bad for the gay cause than it was expressing surprise that people were shocked that openly gay behavior was not appreciated in a context like an MMA fight. DUH!
Yeah, I haven’t seen the film so I don’t know. But I express similar sentiments up thread about Borat.
Posted by Rusty James on July 12th, 2009I am starting to feel the burnout with the racism discussion, and its not because of any lack of opinion, its just that I’m starting to feel that despite our differences, I feel I can talk to Ape now in a more constructive and respectul manner (and vice versa), and I’m not exactly willing to tear that down so quickly. I just wish there’d be more discussion/popping up in movie debates that don’t have overlay into hot button issues.
Posted by Goon on July 12th, 2009>> Blah blah blah some made up story probably cut and pasted from a chain email…
Well you weren’t sitting in the same Pasadena Art Center College of Design academics-trimester classes circa 1995 now were you? Don’t assume that just because it never happened to you it didn’t happen to me.
>> I don’t think you’re a terrible person or anything. But you made some comments in that other thread that lead me to believe that you have some negative and ignorant attitudes black people
Well.. I have my own opinion about your beliefs.. but we’ll save that for another time and another thread.. this one’s played out.
see ya on the flip side…
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 12th, 2009Goon I never had any problem with you.. I’ve always felt you are level headed and fair in your responses.
>> I just wish there’d be more discussion/popping up in movie debates that don’t have overlay into hot button issues.
Sure.. but this thread IS about Bruno’s impact on the gay community. That’s a topic inherently rife with potential debate. I wasn’t the one who brought up the racism/Minstrel robots Transformers thing in this thread by the way.
I guess I’m guilty of tending to post mainly when there’s a chance to rile things up since commenting on who is playing the latest superhero doesn’t excite me as much.
Posted by Damndirtyape on July 12th, 2009@ Well.. I have my own opinion about your beliefs.. but we’ll save that for another time and another thread.. this one’s played out.
Well there’s no reason to be coy. This is the appropriate venue, lets hear what you have to say.
Posted by Rusty James on July 12th, 2009“more people would probably rather hear Henrik and I finally murder each other on tape.â€
But what should be the soundtrack?? I vote for this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ift85e38H3M&feature=fvste1
Posted by Henrik on July 13th, 2009“Yes, it does. That’s like hearing a white dude from the 50’s say “I don’t hate black people, I just don’t want them to have equel rights—
MSJ, with that kind of reasoning you could be the president. You can not compare homosexuality to the civil rights black movement. first there is a huge difrerence between your sexual preffrence and the color of ones skin. The majority of black people get pissed when gays compare thier cause to that of the civil right movement of the 60’s. Not to mention that the reason prop. 8 passed in California this passed election was because record numbers of black people in california got out and voted to support the first half black president.
You can hate the behavior and not the individual because it is possible to seperate behavior from the person. Say a member of your family was a drug addict. Because you hate that they do drugs does that mean you hate the person? of course not. they are still your family. You hate that they do drugs but you still love the individual. hate the behavior, not the person.
you can’t control your skin color no more then you can control weather your tall or short.
And goon you make very good points and i can understand what you believe and why.
but I personally don’t agree with gay marriage. I don’t hate gays, I have tons of gay friends. They know how i feel and why. I love them and they love me. Does that make me a bigot or a hate mongerer? Just because I object to thier behavior it does not mean i hate gays
Posted by rick on July 13th, 2009“The majority of black people get pissed when gays compare thier cause to that of the civil right movement of the 60’s.”
So? They’re wrong. They believe this because their religion dictates that homosexuality is a choice. THere is no good non-religious argument against gay marriage other than that the government should not be involved with marriage.
The whole thing is fucked up anyways, I hate the bullshit ’sanctity of marriage’ crowd when marriage began, and in many parts of the world still today, is entirely a business arrangement, and women are traded like stocks. its entirely absurd when half of straight marriages end in divorce. its entirely absurd when divorce is biblically wrong but straight people aren’t willing to put up any constitutional amendment against THAT – WE all get their way out, but shut the door for other people.
Britney Spears can get married to anyone on a lark, a gay man can marry a straight woman, there are all these reasons why shutting down the marriage argument holds absolutely no weight. And nobody can give me the ’slippery slope’ marry an animal crap, because our government and European governments both made it absolutely clear about these things.
And finally, unlike the arguments made out there, countries with gay marriage did not suddenly turn into Sodom and Gomorrah and ruin straight marriages. I’d love to see statistics of how it could though, I mean they act as if there’s a marriage stock market and people are selling off shares in Wendy and John McCabe.
“Just because I object to thier behavior it does not mean i hate gays”
If you object to the extent that you deny them the same rights as yourself simply because they make you uncomfortable or dont like them sharing a word like ‘marriage’, then sorry, but yes – yes, you do have an unreasonable problem with gay people.
Posted by Goon on July 13th, 2009Its also flat on its face absurd for anyone to say that two adult people who love each other and WANT to get married, are somehow tarring the sanctity of marriage. if anything, they want to strengthen it.
When you quantify “John and Steve’s love is worth less than Nick and Angela’s love” you ARE making an invasive judgment into their lives and using the hammer of the law as your weapon to try and curb it. And the word “civil union” is part of that weapon to still have a “comfort” that these people are different and inferior to other peoples’ ‘good Christian values’. It’s absolutely bullying, to me fascistic, use of the government to judge other people. If you need the government to devalue other peoples consentual love, be it through banning certain kinds of fucking or be it marriage, you have an unreasonable problem that transcends your personal opinion of gay people.
With that in mind, to me your personal opinion on their morality has absolutely no basis in that final decision. You can’t selectively enforce morality against one minority group, and I can’t trust anyone who can’t climb that simple curb.
Posted by Goon on July 13th, 2009The hate towards gay people is starting to get real old. Let them get equal rights and marriage. Like Peter Griffin said, “If they wanna get married and be miserable like the rest of us, let ‘em.”
Posted by Chris on July 13th, 2009If you object to the extent that you deny them the same rights as yourself simply because they make you uncomfortable or dont like them sharing a word like ‘marriage’, then sorry, but yes – yes, you do have an unreasonable problem with gay people.
ha, the same rights? Americans are loosing rights on a daily basis. I’m a white male, I have no rights. Thanks to affermative action (but thats a whole different debate entirely)
And i believe that gay marriage should be left up to the states, and not the federal government.
and the problem with everything goon is that your absolutly right, besides a religious argument (which will get killed in any formal debate) there are no good arguments against gay marriage. But you see, those stupid religious arguments are arguments that are held as beliefs that mean more to people then almost anything else in thier lives. So even though there is no statistic, or legal motive to base thier argument on, it does not matter. Because in thier minds it’s god v. the natural man, and something that is said to be immoral so no facts will get you to change thier mind.
and i’m sorry to say but i do agree with the pandora’s box argument.
Posted by rick on July 13th, 2009“I’m a white male, I have no rights.”
My eyes are rolling for a number of reasons, but see my final sentence for a specific reason why.
Even if they are the minority within their own city (in fact, over half of Toronto is non-white immigrants), when I hear the majority race of the country – Christians or whites – act as if they are being oppressed, I just shake my head. I dont relate to people who sponge off the accomplishments of their own race (and that goes for any race) rather than their own, and I can’t feel sympathy for people who think being the majority race earns them the right to enforce their will on the minority. I could acknowledge certain cases where there are ‘reverse racism’ but in the grand scheme I think these people don’t realize how lucky they are to be white in North America, and the many benefits you get from that every day that you take for granted. I think most of us are really really really spoiled and selfish.
I see no rational reason to believe the Pandora’s box argument, especially when other countries have done this and are just fine. If there is a fear that its going to spread to X then to me that just shows how little some Americans pay attention to how the same hot button issues affect other nations. There is nothing unique about American gay people that indicates things will be any different.
It’s very simple – consenting adults. No kids, ho horses, consenting adults. We dont have gay marriage so much as we have equal marriage. Just like how now a gay person could marry a straight person, two straight people could get married to each other. It’s their choice, no slippery slope. Marriage will exist essentially for people who love each other and need the rights that come with it, but will have as equal an opportunity to be abused or disrespected as straight marriage can be.
People act as if priests are going to be forced to perform gay marriages. Again, shows how little they pay attention to the details about equality under the law.
“…re held as beliefs that mean more to people then almost anything else in thier lives.”
And yet people wonder why atheists get so angry, when laws are on the books not only against gay marriage, but against buttfucking.. It may take a couple generations, but the tide is already turning.
The bottom line is when it comes to marriage nobody is asking for any special rights that you or I won’t have, that or taking rights away from straight people, it is a demand for true equality under the law. And that is EXACTLY how we resolved this issue in Canada.
Posted by Goon on July 13th, 2009“And i believe that gay marriage should be left up to the states, and not the federal government.”
I don’t know all there is to know about the separation between states and federal when it comes to laws, but it seems to me that human rights in regards to the constitution is inherently a more judicial decision, and that when it comes to human rights you don’t put them to a general vote where the majority can automatically deny equality to the minority on their whim. It violates the constitution (I’m pretty sure) and to me again, is fascistic/bullying. The judicial branch exists for a good reason.
When each state has its own constitution though, there are a number of really stupid things that get written into those constitutions that deny equality. There are 7 states that have it in their constitution that an atheist cannot hold elected office (and in some cases even be a juror/witness). Do you believe this is not bullying? Wrong?
Posted by Goon on July 13th, 2009This isn’t about being the majority (which in my mind majority rules.). It’s about how in America whites have nothing any more. God forbid we had a WET like there’s a BET. God forbid we have a white beauty pageant. We have employers running scared because their afraid of getting sued if they don’t hire the minority. If we are all people, and race does not matter then why do we have affirmative action laws and hate crime laws. Those laws only further perpetuate the difference that whites, blacks, yellows, greens, pinks and blues are different, instead of one in the same. I mean, try being white male republican and trying to get a scholarship. GOOD LUCK!
Posted by rick on July 13th, 2009if we did everything that other countries did then we would have socialized medicine which is killing Canada and England right now (even though were on that path now).
“If there is a fear that its going to spread to X then to me that just shows how little some Americans pay attention to how the same hot button issues affect other nations.â€
……are you kidding?!?! Canada never get involves with any body doing anything. I’d like to think I’m pretty up and up on today’s news, and I don’t remember the last time I heard someone say ‘OH MY GOD, DID YOU HEAR WHAT HAPPENED???? CANADA……… yeah, I think not.
And yes I get that, no dogs, no kids, no goats…..but the problem is how many rights (civil or what have you). But It’s all a matter of time. Rights are rights, how can you say one love is less important then another. What if three consenting adults want to get married? What if five or ten?
To tell you the truth, I don’t really care one way or another. I agree with what that one person said that was quoting peter griffin. ‘if gay’s wanna get married and be as miserable as the rest of us, let emâ€
“which in my mind majority rules.”
dude, this is such a dangerous mindset, you throw out this line about a pandoras box from gay marriage, and yet this mindset about other peoples human rights is how the worst things in the world have happened, not realizing that one persons rights end where another persons begin.
its also weird to you pull the majority rule thing and then complain about UHC when every US polls says the majority want the government to be involved in more coverage, and Canada France Britain etc would all riot if you took it away from us. So its one standard one minute and then trying to win based on the strength of the opinion the other.
You also missed the point about looking at other nations entirely. The point is that the US is making slippery slope arguments about gay marriage that were already brought up in other countries before they took action (leading to multiple spouses, etc) which have not happened and show no evidence trend of coming into fruition. No increased demand for any of the other horrors that would supposedly result.
You act as if the law never addressed or considered the ’slippery slope’ and what equality means. The equality is reached when marriage is open to any two people of straight or gay sexual orientation. Stuff like incestual marriage, multiple spouses, etc does not get opened because those doors are equally shut to all people of all races, genders and straight-or-gay sexual orientations. The law keeps those things into an entirely different category so no legal precedent is made. They also insured that religious institutions would not have to perform then against their own will, something I’ve seen religious groups claim would happen.
So all you have are hypotheticals and rhetoricals that are getting weaker and weaker every year as the countless other countries with gay marriage neither get struck down by the hand of god nor cause straight divorce, etc.
And besides, if you actually believe the ‘majority rules’ then if the majority wanted incest and bestiality, I guess by your standard its suddenly acceptible?
NOW….
I’d rather you stop changing the subject to your racial pity party. But if you are trying to convince me a white person’s daily life in America is more difficult than a black person’s, or a gay person’s, then I recommend you throw on an earring and a scarf and pretend to be gay for a week and see what happens. You have absolutely no idea of the ordeals my sister has gone through in her life for being gay, who is by no means any sort of stereotype and does not even throw it in peoples faces. Her hardships have far surpassed losing out on one job or a hundred jobs, I promise you.
So please spare me the hypothetical “soandso could get a job before me!” line, because I can throw countless real life real experience examples back in your face of people I’ve known who were discriminated against, fired, or for that matter, beaten the fucking tar out of – for no reason other than their race or sexual orientation. In fact, when i was 16, I myself was attacked and beaten with skateboards down the road from my house by two kids who thought I was gay. Once again, I believe if you think you have it so tough as a white person, you take your skin color for granted and all the advantages it gives you in this world – even if sometimes in one place or another you may get treated unfair. You say ‘majority rules’, if you apply that to race then you are saying to me you are entitled to extra by nature of your race. I say you are absolutely not.
Here’s all I want to say about hate crime laws and AA.
Hate crime laws – I’m against them, you might as well watch the South Park episode on it, I feel they made their point well. but I’ve not paid close enough attention for a good long time so maybe theres some example out there someone could present for me or better explanation of them.
AA – I am in favor it if it is based on class. Poor people are never going to get out of their situation without something to help them. Without addressing these situations you only continue or worsen the cycle and further divide the classes. As much as I admire the ‘pull yourself up by your bootstraps’ attitude of the States, fact is a lot of kids are denied education becuase of the fault or simply BAD LUCK of their parents. Bad shit happens to people who did nothing wrong and who worked hard all their lives, who saved up but got sick or injured and lost everything. Who lose a parent and become instantly poor. Too many act as if poor people are all choosing to be this way, but they dont account for simple luck and realistic fate. AA is at its best a pragmatic decision for the betterment of society, and not just a handout. Less poor = less crime and even a healthier public and a number of other things tied into that web. It is for many of these same reasons that I support UHC and would join my fellow Canadians in rioting if they took it away.
Once again, I am sick of people who act as if something given to someone else is something that is being taken away from them. America is one of the most charitable nations towards other countries, but at the same time it seems to be so caught up in their own rat race that they become selfish and blind to the benefit of helping others, that in the long term it does indeed come back to you. They stick this ‘american dream’ carrot in front of your head that so many of the powers that be are trying to prevent you from ever reaching, hoping that instead you will turn on each other and blame each other for not acheiving it. They are succeeding at this game.
Posted by Goon on July 13th, 2009” the majority want the government to be involved in more coverage”
The majority also doesn’t know how much government is already involved in health care through subsidiaries to insurance companies. Not to mention Medicaid and Medicare. If they did they might not be so gung ho about universal health care as run by the bloated bureaucracy we call the government.
“fact is a lot of kids are denied education becuase of the fault or simply BAD LUCK of their parents.”
Denied education? How? Even the poorest school districts have, well, public schools. How are you defining the word education? If you have said “quality education” then I’d say you had a valid statement.
“Poor people are never going to get out of their situation without something to help them.”
Agreed but I see the solution in being more accessible entry level jobs that have a more level starting wage. What people, especially teens, need are jobs that give them skills to advance to higher paying and more rewarding jobs. There are, however, major barriers to this.
“Less poor = less crime”
Let me introduce you to the relationship between local, state, and federal law enforcement and poor communities. That marriage was officiated by politicians, who is both parties’ parent. There are powerful groups that stand to lose quite a lot if everyone is given a level playing field.
Posted by Dave on July 13th, 2009oh geez goon. spare your your psycho-babble on majority rules. This country was founded on the principle of majority. it all comes down to a vote. if more people are for something and less people against it, then that is infact what should happen. So don’t take it to the extreme of incest or bestiality to make your point, becuase that would not happen. however in the sake of gay marriage it did. One persons right is always infringing on someone elses. like smokers now have to smoke in a place that almost resembles a zoo. You have to watch your language in certain public areas. It is now almost a criminal act to shoot someone that enters your house with the intent to do you or your family harm. you can’t smoke weed, you have to wear your seat belt, trying to do anything so they can to outlaw guns (which i believed are already out-lawed in cannada.)
what about the mother fuckin illegal immigrints who have the right to social security, welfare, get jobs, and are able to obtain drivers licenses.
and don’t sit here and pander to me about how easy white people have it. because a couple black people got beat up were instantly got the upper hand? what about the gangs that kill thousands of white people every year. what about the families who have to cross to the other side of the street because thier afraid for thier lives to go to the other corner. What about the hundreds of children that die every year as a result of stray bullets from drive by shootings. That if anything that seems white motivated is in threat of a lawsuit. what about that case that surpreme court nominee sotamayor just rulled that it was racially biased and that employers need racial quotas (luckily it was overturned by the surpreme court) but still. what about forcing our schools to teach spanish to our kids instead of teach spanish kids english because they have a right to keep thier cultrual herritige. FUCK THAT!!!
and i’m sick of people who go “ooo poor gays they can’t marry” then move to a state that alows it. move to a country that will allow it! if america is so bad stop bitching and go somewhere else. as a result of prop 8 being passed the gays decided to go to war with the chuch of jesus christ of latter day saints (mormons). they attacked several churches. some by where i live. they defamed private property, broke windows, and put up thretening signs. even though we had nothing to do with the vote in utah when it took place in cali. two gay people were making out on church private property, they were asked to leave. they got beligerent, so they were escorted out. then on sunday there was a protest by a mormon church where they had a kiss out and yelled obscenities. this is the agenda i’m supposed to support. people who go to a place where people worship god with thier little kids and families, and shout obscenities and lude, crude, redicioulous comments. you tell me, is that right?
I don’t like socialized medicine for the fact that it is not right to make me pay for someone elses hardships. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be something there to help people who are trying to make ends meet, have a crap load of doctor bills, and are up to thier neck in dr. bills. but i thought that was what welfare was for? but they need to fix it. first stop giving it to illegals, second, all people need to be currently employed to get it. Third, they can only use the welfare money for certain things. food, rent, or utilities.
Posted by rick on July 13th, 2009Alright guys, hate to do this but I’m closing down the comments on this post. You’re not discussing the movie anymore and I really don’t think you’re going to settle your differences here. Thanks for being relatively civil anyway.
Posted by Sean on July 13th, 2009