Phil Robertson "Fired"

[CensoredAlso]

I'm not saying I agree with marrying a girl at 16, but in Louisiana (and other states) it is legal. All they need is the parents consent. And in some cases it is legal to marry younger than 16, with the parents consent and a judges consent. It's kind of hard to condemn him for marrying a 16 year old when it is legal and her parents consented to it. Again, I'm not agreeing with it but you can't really hold it against him if it's legal.

Well legal just means legal, not moral or appropriate. A lot of awful things have been legal in this country and even today there are questionable things that have the law on their side.

I won't completely condemn him because he's from an earlier time. But had he and his wife married today at 16 and 20 I wouldn't approve of it, legal or not. Today I would recommend waiting a few years.

 

[jvcarroll]

You can hold it against him even if it's legal. Legal just means legal, not moral or appropriate. A lot of awful things have been legal in this country and even today there are questionable things that have the law on their side.

I won't completely condemn him because he's from an earlier time. But had he and his wife married today at 16 and 20 I wouldn't approve of it, legal or not. Today I would recommend waiting a few years.

He's from an "earlier time" when women over 20 were considered middle-aged hags intent on robbing their husbands blind because, of course, they had no real skills or worth without a man. (sarcasm)

 

[CensoredAlso]

He's from an "earlier time" when women over 20 were considered middle-aged hags intent on robbing their husbands blind because, of course, they had no real skills or worth without a man. (sarcasm)

Indeed, the good old days weren't always good, lol.

 

[MuppetsRule]

He's from an "earlier time" when women over 20 were considered middle-aged hags intent on robbing their husbands blind because, of course, they had no real skills or worth without a man. (sarcasm)

I think this brings up an interesting point. We see a very short video clip of Phil Robertson commenting on marrying young and his views on women. We have no idea the context of the message or whether he was joking or not. Jamie has the advantage here of adding (sarcasm) after his post. Phil Robertson doesn't have that advantage in the clip. I think we have to be careful about condemning or judging people based on 30-60 second video clips on the internet without knowing the person themselves. I'm not a regular viewer of Duck Dynasty but from what I have seen the show isn't about making fun of "hillbillies" but more about making fun of themselves. They also stress family values a lot.

 

[Drtooth]

The whole Michael Richards thing, to me it's the perfect example of just because you're a comedic actor doesn't mean you know how to do stand up comedy. A few years ago, I went to see a different comedic actor attempt a stand up routine (won't mention his name) and he made a lot of jokes that were incredibly awkward jabs at different nationalities. It was pretty embarrassing but I don't believe for a minute the guy was racist. I just think he had zero ability to write his own stand up material (or handle hecklers) and was floundering miserably. Sort of like how George Lucas isn't racist, but actually though Jar Jar was funny.

Oh, yes... definitely. That's the reason he was seen more as a joke than a menace. It's not so much that he shouted a bunch of angry hateful sounding nonsense as a passive aggressive come back, it's that he completely and utterly bombed and had a mental breakdown. It was a crappy last ditch effort to shut a bunch of hecklers up, and he'd pull any kind of extreme insult no matter who was in the audience heckling him. He went for a racial thing because he was angry and not thinking straight.

There are many other comedians that can defuse that situation and make the hecklers look like the biggest losers out there. I read something about Patton Oswalt totally handing a heckler's butt to himself. Michael wasn't savvy. He probably was pretty lousy as a stand up comedian, and he really had no legitimate work for years, and here he is in a dive bar being heckled. He acted out of anger boneheadedly, but was considered to be a joke over being offensive.

I take it back a bit... it probably cost him his career, but he probably didn't have much of one to begin with anyway. Though he did totally have a cameo in Bee Movie that had to go uncredited or Alan Smithee'd.

 

[jvcarroll]

I think this brings up an interesting point. We see a very short video clip of Phil Robertson commenting on marrying young and his views on women. We have no idea the context of the message or whether he was joking or not. Jamie has the advantage here of adding (sarcasm) after his post. Phil Robertson doesn't have that advantage in the clip. I think we have to be careful about condemning or judging people based on 30-60 second video clips on the internet without knowing the person themselves. I'm not a regular viewer of Duck Dynasty but from what I have seen the show isn't about making fun of "hillbillies" but more about making fun of themselves. They also stress family values a lot.

The featured clip was two and a half minutes long and offered substancial context for his statement. It wasn't just a "60 second clip." There's really no defense for what was said unless somebody desires to invent one.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Two and a half minutes isn't really enough to judge a man either. Look, the guy's crude, he's not going to say the right things, but that doesn't mean we can assume he's a horrible husband. Archie Bunker said a lot of awful things, but he was not an awful person. That was the whole point of that characterization.

People should be judged by their actions, not just their words. And judged by their entire life, not just by a two and a half minute clip.

 

[Drtooth]

The featured clip was two and a half minutes long and offered substancial context for his statement. It wasn't just a "60 second clip." There's really no defense for what was said unless somebody desires to invent one.

Even if he was joking and being sarcastic, that was a very poor joke. I'm sure someone would like to paint him as "he comes from another time," but unless that time was before the Hoover administration, it's not all that forgivable. Joking or not. Though I also agree I can't completely condemn him for marrying so young, as that's for some reason legal (in a state that would condemn gay marriage between two consensual, adult, emotionally mature and ready people). I condemn the heck out of the law, though.

Two and a half minutes isn't really enough to judge a man either. Look, the guy's crude, he's not going to say the right things, but that doesn't mean we can assume he's a horrible husband. Archie Bunker said a lot of awful things, but he was not an awful person. That was the whole point of that characterization.

I'll agree that his values don't necessarily mean he's a terrible person, just a person with really skewed values. Yet it was his choice to share them in a poorly worded, impolite way that painted him in an unfavorable light. Trapped, joking, or otherwise.

 

[jvcarroll]

Two and a half minutes isn't really enough to judge a man either. Look, the guy's crude, he's not going to say the right things, but that doesn't mean we can assume he's a horrible husband. Archie Bunker said a lot of awful things, but he was not an awful person. That was the whole point of that characterization.

People should be judged by their actions, not just their words. And judged by their entire life, not just by a two and a half minute clip.

That's certainly enough time to assess his statement in the context given. The guy isn't just crude, he's sexist and his encouraging guys to zero-in on underage girls is kinda rapey.

 

[Drtooth]

That's certainly enough time to assess his statement in the context given. The guy isn't just crude, he's sexist and his encouraging guys to zero-in on underage girls is kinda rapey.

The fact this guy is so adamantly against homosexuality (claiming religion as a cheap excuse) yet, even if it was in a joking manner, endorses marryin' 'em young speaks bounds about how smurfed up his values are. I'm sure he has lots of videos of "gaffes" that continue to paint him in a terrible light in his past and future, respectively. And not one of them will get the show cancelled or pull paychecks out of the family's mouth. And even if it did, it wouldn't scrub his mind clean.

I'll agree with the South Park referenced "Tolerance Death Camp" (or whatever) herald brought up. Nothing is going to get this guy and fans of his that sympathize with him to stop thinking in offensive long lost values. All we can hope is that others find how ridiculous that mode of thinking is and lets it die out generational. I tend to see it as passing generations become more tolerant because... well... they stopped giving 2 craps about it.