RECENT  POSTS:  » No, you really don't seem to know what tyranny is, Jerry Cox » Vatican's #Humanum event meant to paint gay families as 'evil' and 'obscene,' admits invited guest » Read: Federal judge calls MS's marriage ban what it is: discriminatory » Yet another federal judge accurately notes crude discrimination within Arkansas' marriage ban » Prominent conservative outlet equates LGBT activists with Nazi paramilitary » New pledge: Conservative pastors choose to separate selves from civil marriage » Read: ADF creates fake 'victim' superbook; misapplies business matters to churches » P&G reaches out to pro-discrimination activist, learns it made right choice » In prep for Pope's 2015 visit, World Meeting of Families readies gay stigma, exclusion » Today in ambition: NOM cofounder vows to fight marriage equality for 100 years  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/14/2008

Video: Can we all just stop booking this show?

by Jeremy Hooper

Ugh. Just ugh:

These protests are violent? No. Thousands upon thousands of people have protested, and there have been a scant number of incidents that have perhaps gone a little far. Some of these have been spun to sound and look much worse than they are.

There were only 1,000 people at the NYC protest? Uhm, Bill -- estimates put the number closer to 10,000. Those two figures may only be one zero apart, but there difference is not small.

Scott Eckern was "targeted"? PUH-LEEZE! As one of the first sites to bring his donation to light, we take great offense at that. He gave money. We caught wind of that money. We put the information out there and let the situation play out as situations always do. There was just as much opportunity for folks to react positively as there was for folks to react negatively.

And as food for thought: Can you even IMAGINE if someone who holds a top position in a business with a high evangelical support basis donated to the "no on 8" side? We have, after all, seen the blackmail and extortion attempts that the "yes on 8" side used against pro-gay donors. Can you even begin to imagine if it were one of their own who gave to our side?!

Differences in civil rights struggles? Yes, Jasmyne -- despite you appointing yourself as the one to put a definitive on this issue, most every one of us realizes that there are great differences between race and sexuality and the two equality fights. It's quite unfair to act as if the gay civil rights movement is a monolith who "doesn't get" these differences. Those who see and draw parallels do so because there are genuine parallels! It's not an "either" (a direct comparison between the two fights) or and "or" (no connection at all). There is gradation and nuance here.

Wayne "doesn't get it" because he has differing opinions on this multi-faceted subject? The suggestion that Wayne's trying to speak for everyone by presenting his views? That's completely unfair! Wayne is presenting other sides of a story. Ably, in fact. And his opponent glib and even hostile reaction towards his opinions only hurts this conversation. It makes us sad, actually.

Homosexuality is "an action"? Stop it, Bill. Just stop it. We all see through the stealth way you present uber-conservative information behind an "oh, I'm just an independent" mask, which is exactly what you are doing here. The idea that homosexuality is merely an "action" is unsupported by the vast majority of credible science (not to mention actual gay folks).

Bill's "correction" at the end? Religious Americans DO have a right to their opinion, expression, and vote. That means we should "respect" that they used their faith-based views to eliminate a civil right? That means we don't have the right to reaction and civilly protest? And it's "Bible bashing" if we don't just shut up and go along with the historical misstep? Well those ideas are about is as un-American and unfair as Prop 8 itself!!

Seriously, folks -- this show is not conducive to a reasoned discussion on our issues. Let's just stop going on it. Let's stop subjecting ourselves to this micro-managed environment that wishes to divide rather than unite us!

**RELATED O'REILLY: Stewart to O'Reilly: Gay Marriage the Next Step in America's Tradition [Towle]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Scott Eckern was "targeted" because he supported something that "targeted" gay people in the first place. That's just retaliation - a big difference.

Speaking of that little hopping mad leprechaun, where's his outrage over THIS video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfQRUFQde-E

If you remember, a year or so ago, Bill freaked out over "the coolest 8 year old in the world" video on YouTube (from an Atheist family) who said some pretty funny things about him and other so-called conservative "christians".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8x14cLGh5o

So why isn't he screaming "CHILD ABUSE!!" like he done with the 8 year old girl, over this glassy-eyed woman teaching her baby girl to say "Fuck Obama!"?

Posted by: Scott | Nov 14, 2008 9:06:53 AM

O'Reilly is a pompous ass. I haven't watched his show for years and haven't missed it at all. He's just one of a number of TV & radio hosts from both sides that I refuse to listen to and very much dislike. I don't mind listening to a host whom I disagree with but not the kind of "shock jock" BS which tries to pass itself off as serious commentary.

Posted by: John | Nov 14, 2008 11:54:31 AM

Jeremy -- the "homosexuality is an action" line really pissed me off because gay men and lesbians don't get fired because we got lucky on Saturday night -- we get fired because we're gay. And we get beaten up. And we get harassed. You get the idea. Homosexuality is no more an action than being Mormon is an action, or being a conservative asshat is an action.

Posted by: tjc | Nov 14, 2008 11:57:57 AM

Yes, TJC -- it's an infuriating idea.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Nov 14, 2008 12:05:42 PM

Bill O'Reilly is nothing more than a puppet being used to make the wingnuts feel good about themselves by listening to their idiocy being fed back to them.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Nov 14, 2008 12:52:19 PM

I heard Jasmyne speak during a good portion of...I think Monday or Tuesday's Talk of the Nation on NPR, and I think when she doesn't have Bill-o digging for a sound byte that fits his talking-points agenda of the night, she made what I thought were very good points.

As I understood her, her point was not about the strong similarities that exist between the two civil rights movements (or lack thereof), and I think she believes that they do, but that from a practical standpoint, if we're trying to convince people in the black christian community, we're simply NOT going to be successful with the language we've been using up until now.

I don't know how much I agree with that, after all the late Coretta Scott King believed that they were similar enough to call it the civil rights movement of our day. But I can understand her point that for many in the black community, simply the phrase alone, "civil rights" has meaning that they cannot carry over to the gay rights movement.

Posted by: zortnac | Nov 14, 2008 1:59:22 PM

but seriously...why are either of them going on this terrible show?

Posted by: zortnac | Nov 14, 2008 1:59:52 PM

I love how Bill O'Reilly cannot get them to say what he wants them to say, so then he says, "Ok let me speak for conservative blacks."

Jasmyne does have her point. There was no outreach to the black community. The No on 8 campaign failed miserably. What I am waiting to hear from her is, and what I am asking myself is, what can we do about that? At this point, looking backward is only useful as a tool to see how we can best move forward.

Posted by: ilikestuff | Nov 14, 2008 2:34:44 PM

WASTED OPPORTUNITY

It my be true that Cannick may have some good points, but the role she took in the interview was to place Wayne Besen in the role of being a proxy for the "No on 8" campaign, and attack him for that.

Rather than saying that (1) same-sex marriage is a worthy goal, (2) African-American support for Prop 8 was wrong, and (3) the same-sex marriage proponents needed to make more outreach to blacks, she took the negative view of saying "gays are not entitled to the support of African-Americans" and thus left viewers feeling like she was opposed to same-sex marriage and leaving Wayne to stand up to O'Reilly.

This would have been a great opportunity for two gay guests to stand up to O'Reilly, and let HIM divide blacks and gays while we stood together. She could have said "Look, the No On Prop 8" campaign made some mistakes, but the result is taking away rights, we need to do better." Instead, she couldn't see beyond her narrow vista and has done great damage to her own cause.

Posted by: Walt | Nov 14, 2008 3:22:01 PM

I just lost a lot, not quite all, but definitely a lot of respect for Ms Cannick, who I use to really enjoy listening to on her now defunct podcast. She totally put to much energy into the argument of this trite question is gay rights equivolent to black civil rights? In my opinion they are the extremely close. But that's not the issue,the real issue at hand is that both groups faced and still face incredible discrimination, however blacks no longer face it under the law, we (glbt comummunity)do. Any black, latino or any other minority that voted for Prop 8 SHOULD be incredibly ashamed of themselves. Discrimination is discrimination no matter how you slice it. The so called activist Ms Cannick seemed to have missed that point and wanted to focus on "strategy." Minorities, especially blacks, don't need to be strategically talked to about the harmful life long effects of being discriminated against. By the way, I am very much a gay BLACK man.

Posted by: Ron | Nov 14, 2008 7:22:51 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails