And America Continues to Show it's True Colors. . .

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
40,651
Reaction score
12,811
Inevitably, this did end up becoming the new Trump thread, but now it's time to steer it back into the original topic when this thread was created:

So, it was just announced that the new live action version of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST will feature Disney's first-ever openly gay character: LeFou. While I think it can be argued that many people interpreted LeFou as being a gay character in the animated version with his fascination with Gaston, the live action version of LeFou is openly interested in Gaston.

And, of course, parents are outraged over this and boycotting the movie altogether, because Disney has no business trying to cater to "less than one percent" of the American population that our children should not be exposed to. Or so they say.

Interestingly enough, when David Ogden Stiers came out of the closet several years ago, he mentioned it was easy working for Disney because not only was Disney a gay-friendly studio (for the most part), but it's easy to invoke a flamboyant streak into animated characters and get away with it.
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
Inevitably, this did end up becoming the new Trump thread, but now it's time to steer it back into the original topic when this thread was created:

So, it was just announced that the new live action version of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST will feature Disney's first-ever openly gay character: LeFou. While I think it can be argued that many people interpreted LeFou as being a gay character in the animated version with his fascination with Gaston, the live action version of LeFou is openly interested in Gaston.

And, of course, parents are outraged over this and boycotting the movie altogether, because Disney has no business trying to cater to "less than one percent" of the American population that our children should not be exposed to. Or so they say.

Interestingly enough, when David Ogden Stiers came out of the closet several years ago, he mentioned it was easy working for Disney because not only was Disney a gay-friendly studio (for the most part), but it's easy to invoke a flamboyant streak into animated characters and get away with it.
Ha! Yeah, let's overlook that the tale romanticizes Stockholm Syndrome. Ha! Kind of kidding about that, but it makes more sense than pretending gay people don't exist or that LGBT people need to recruit others into the fold. Gay happens. It's not something that can be manufactured. Also, were more than 1% of the population. The people fighting this casting, however, aren't probably even 1% of 1% of the population. The real figure is about 4% of people who (openly) identify as LGBT in America. That's about how many Chinese Americans there are. Should we forget about them too because they make up such a small percentage of America? That's the question to ask anyone who ever brings that chestnut up about the LGBT. :wink: The funniest thing is a lot of gay groups are worried this character will be too much of a stereotype. :stick_out_tongue:
 

MuppetsRule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2002
Messages
2,658
Reaction score
1,758
Yes, I think these responses leave much to be desired. How do I know what Obama would have done? Because he demonstrated that sort of leadership many times. Also, the White House isn't Trump. When he's peeved at SNL, the criticism comes directly from him and it comes instantly. Trying to get him to combat these acts of racism, some of it done in his name by misguided people, and antisemitism is like pulling teeth. He avoids it at all costs because he doesn't want to lose his more racist fringe supporters. That said, he mentioned this *first* in last night's address to congress. I give him great recognition for that and I hope it continues. As for the rest of the speech, blueugh! Sad. I'm not sure what the condemnation of certain states with high incidents of hate crimes is all about. You know, places with diverse populations are prime for more friction. But that's a conflation with another topic. To be honest, I'm not seeing much fairness in your responses of late and the accusations are getting more personal again so I'm going to **respectfully** take a break from contact for a while. :wink:
My responses aren't fair and I'm getting personal????!!! Sorry if they come across as personal to you but asking President Trump supporters to answer a question without "lame excuses" seems pretty personal and dismissive on your part. I'm done here as well as I don't believe you are truly interested in having an honest discussion.

And the White House isn't Trump? Now you're just playing semantics. So the White House condemns the recent vandalism and bomb threats and it's not in the right form for you? Like I said about him curing cancer . . . .
 
Last edited:

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
My responses aren't fair and I'm getting personal????!!! Sorry if they come across as personal to you but asking President Trump supporters to answer a question without "lame excuses" seems pretty personal and dismissive on your part. I'm done here as well as I don't believe you are truly interested in having an honest discussion.

And the White House isn't Trump? Now you're just playing semantics. So the White House condemns the recent vandalism and bomb threats and it's not in the right form for you? Like I said about him curing cancer . . . .
[Disclaimer: This will be my last response to you for a while so please take this in the respectful way I intend (and please don't try to encourage a response from me). I'll freely admit when another progressive has messed up. I'm not seeing the same thing from Trump supporters in general so that's where the plea for no lame excuses came from. For you to personalize that only goes further to prove my point that civil conversation is reaching an end here. The use of excessive exclamation points, my excessive use of asterisks and the repetitive hyperbole about curing cancer only serve to highlight that most of us are making circles instead of progress. Peace.]

Here are my final thoughts: The White House making a statement isn't the same as Trump himself making one. I've explained why and I'll repeat it once more. When SNL does a sketch, Trump goes immediately to Twitter and says something - even if it's three o'clock in the morning. When something horrible and antisemitic happens, a formal statement is sometimes issued by the White House, but seldom a personal one from Trump himself. It's clear to see they don't both carry the same weight. I was actually proud of that moment last night. It was long overdue.

As someone who's been very civil for pages here, someone who's voted for both Republicans and Democrats in my life, someone who made a point to note my appreciation for the opening of Trump's speech last night, I do believe I've been pretty darn fair. :wink: Even though I am quite passionate, I most certainly have demonstrated a longing for an honest discussion. I just don't see that happening between us over the past couple posts so I'm ***respectfully and responsibly*** bowing out so things don't get ugly on either side. Peace. :smile:
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
2,001
I think preemptively ending a dialog that seems to be becoming all-around contentious, or at least taking a cooling off period, should be supported. That's all. :smile:
 

scooterfan360

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
851
Reaction score
413
I'll respond to this. (You'll have to let me know if they are what you call "lame excuses"). Then I have a request from you.

The White House DID condemn the acts of vandalism and the recent bomb threats to JCCs across America. A simple google search can give you that. The FBI is also involved investigating the bomb threats and the vandalism to the cemeteries. What else are you expecting President Trump to do? What else would you have him do? Just because he condemns something isn't going to make it magically go away. During my google search I found condemnation from Trump as far back as December 22nd, before he even took office. And as far as President Obama goes and what he would have done? You don't know what he would have done. There were many acts of violence he didn't go in front of the cameras and make a statement. Many of the recent riots he was crickets on. The targeting of police officers that took place a year or so ago? President Obama was criticized for not speaking out more strongly on that. So don't pretend that it's just President Trump here. There's plenty of criticism to go around. But like I said earlier in this thread about President Trump curing cancer . . . .

And now my request. Can you please produce one shred of evidence that these acts were done by Trump supporters? Can you? So until then, quit trying to link these recent acts of stupidity with President Trump or his supporters. You have no idea who perpetrated them. Hate crime in general has been on the rise much earlier than the appearance of Donald Trump on the political scene, actually going back to the election of President Obama. From an NBC News report in 2014 based on FBI crime numbers:


There were 784 active hate groups in the United States in 2014, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The number of such groups surged in response to President Barack Obama's election and the economic downturn — growing from 888 in 2008 to 1,007 in 2012 — before falling to 939 a year later and then the lowest level since 2005, according to Mark Potok, who tracks extremist groups for the SPLC.

"Those numbers may be somewhat deceiving," Potok wrote in the SPLC's "The Year in Hate and Extremism" report. "More than half of the decline in hate groups was of Ku Klux Klan chapters, and many of those have apparently gone underground, ending public communications, rather than disbanding."


And what states had the most hate groups? From the same article:



The SPLC lists these states as having the highest number of active hate groups in 2014:

  • California (57)
  • Florida (50)
  • New York (44)
  • New Jersey (40)
  • Pennsylvania (38)
  • Texas (36)
  • Tennessee (29)
  • Georgia (28)
  • Ohio (27)

Notice three of the top 4? California, New York, and New Jersey. Who again did those states vote for in the last presidential election?

I'd suggest you check out the article. Some interesting articles, including how hate crimes against Jews far outnumber hate crimes against any other group.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/charleston-church-shooting/hate-crime-america-numbers-n81521


whoa ,California has the most hate groups, i wonder which hate groups are there ?
 

dwayne1115

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
7,998
Reaction score
3,317
Inevitably, this did end up becoming the new Trump thread, but now it's time to steer it back into the original topic when this thread was created:

So, it was just announced that the new live action version of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST will feature Disney's first-ever openly gay character: LeFou. While I think it can be argued that many people interpreted LeFou as being a gay character in the animated version with his fascination with Gaston, the live action version of LeFou is openly interested in Gaston.

And, of course, parents are outraged over this and boycotting the movie altogether, because Disney has no business trying to cater to "less than one percent" of the American population that our children should not be exposed to. Or so they say.

Interestingly enough, when David Ogden Stiers came out of the closet several years ago, he mentioned it was easy working for Disney because not only was Disney a gay-friendly studio (for the most part), but it's easy to invoke a flamboyant streak into animated characters and get away with it.
I'm surprisedthat Sesame Street has not done something for the LGBT community. I mean they have hit a lot of other hard topics, but not that. I'm sure that a child being rasied by either two mommy's or two daddy's would be a challenge. I'm also sure that there is probably a lot of bulling of kids in those kind of families.
It could be done, but they would have to do it well, to be able to get the message across.
 

Pig'sSaysAdios

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
6,506
Reaction score
4,646
I'm surprisedthat Sesame Street has not done something for the LGBT community. I mean they have hit a lot of other hard topics, but not that. I'm sure that a child being rasied by either two mommy's or two daddy's would be a challenge. I'm also sure that there is probably a lot of bulling of kids in those kind of families.
It could be done, but they would have to do it well, to be able to get the message across.
Nah, that episode would be way too controversial. That's still a very divisive issue, and there's no way a lot of parents would let that slide. I mean, just look at the huge backlash that Cheerios commercial got a couple years ago just because it had an interracial couple on it. There's no way a same sex couple would pass.
 

Old Thunder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2015
Messages
5,217
Reaction score
3,422
Gotta say honestly, both @Pig's Laundry and @dwayne1115 have valid points here. Doing an LGBT+ episode would be controversial, and lots of people wouldn't like it, but theoretically it could be done. So long as it was done tastefully and informatively, I think that they could pull it off - for the LGBT+ community, of course. Like Pig's Laundry said, something like that is still way too controversial at this point and I highly doubt we'll see them do it anytime soon.
 
Top