GLAAD Responds to Phil Robertson's GQ Comments Regarding Homosexuality

[Teh One Who Knocks]

by Zach Johnson - E! Online


http://i.imgur.com/EwWpqTp.jpg

Shortly after Phil Robertson's GQ interview was published online on Wednesday, Dec. 18, a GLAAD spokesperson issued a statement regarding the Duck Dynasty star's controversial comments about gay men.

"It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me," the 67-year-old A&E reality star said in the feature, which appears in the magazine's January 2014 issue. "I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical."

Robertson—who described his family as "Bible-thumpers who just happened to end up on television"—cited his strong religious faith with shaping his views about homosexuality.

The duck hunter also linked homosexuality to bestiality and rattled off a number of other stereotypes.

"Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe," GLAAD spokesperson Wilson Cruz tells E! News in a statement. "He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans—and Americans—who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples."

Cruz adds, "Phil's decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families."

GLAAD has also reached out to the network regarding Robertson's comments.

The Robertson family resides in the state of Louisiana, which passed a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality. Still, according to public policy polling released in August, 56 percent of its residents support some sort of legal recognition, marriage or civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.

[Muddy]

Two points,






"It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me,"

:lol: I'm with him on that... Even if you think chuck or Jimmy is cute, how in the fuck do you get over the physical part of sucking a dick or sniffing another mans ass.. That is some fucked up shit, man.




And this..
The Robertson family resides in the state of Louisiana, which passed a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality.

Boy, that's a creative and condemning way of saying something, versus, "banning gay marriage".. That one gets a big fuckin' eyeroll from me..

[Teh One Who Knocks]

My problem with organizations like GLAAD is that they feel like they have to go out of their way to respond to anything and everything that is said that they don't agree with...whether you agree with what the guy said, he was asked a question and he answered it honestly. Funny, the people over at GLAAD (and all the same types of advocacy groups) all scream discrimination when someone says something that doesn't agree with their agenda, but they have no problem discriminating against someone for giving an honest thought about what the truly believe/feel. Fucking bunch of hypocrites.

[Hal-9000]

sniffing another man's ass



:rofl:

[DemonGeminiX]

I'd say most Christians believe the same thing Phil does. They've read the Bible, they've been taught that it's God's word, and the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God...

... I don't think GLAAD knows what it's talking about.

[DemonGeminiX]

Oh Christ... this just in... they suspended Phil from the show for his comments.

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=844242

:roll:

I'm really starting to hate gay people.

[Muddy]

Obviously some little faggot at the network has been offended.. He'll be back.. Money talks and bullshit walks.. Lets hope he doesn't cave..

[PorkChopSandwiches]

Everybody needs to stop worrying about what consensual adults do in the bedroom

[Muddy]

Everybody needs to stop worrying about what consensual adults do in the bedroom

Totally agree.. If only it could just be left there..

[PorkChopSandwiches]

Then you would have no lezzy pr0n

[Muddy]

I pay for that..

[RBP]

Boy, that's a creative and condemning way of saying something, versus, "banning gay marriage".. That one gets a big fuckin' eyeroll from me..

It went to the LA voters, who decided with 78% approval, to define marriage as one man and one woman. If I am correct, gay marriage has never been passed when put to the voters. Maybe one more recent state, I haven't look in a while. But in almost all cases, the voters say no. It's the courts and legislatures that try to make it law.

[Acid Trip]

The Duck Dynasty family should find a new network that agrees with their Christian values. Given their viewership that shouldn't be hard to do.

[Hal-9000]

Everybody needs to stop worrying about what consensual adults do in the bedroom

Here here!




no really....come over here and ride me like a 25 cent Coney Island Merrygoround :dance:

[RBP]

Here here!

no really....come over here and ride me like a 25 cent Coney Island Merrygoround :dance:

And you wonder why you get the posts you do. :shock:

[PorkChopSandwiches]

The Duck Dynasty family should find a new network that agrees with their Christian values. Given their viewership that shouldn't be hard to do.

I was just coming here to post that, that whole family should stand behind him. WTF you cant have a personal opinion.

[Hal-9000]

And you wonder why you get the posts you do. :shock:

touching on the ' everybody needs to stop worrying about what consensual adults do in the bedroom ' comment



there are layers to my clever posts :dance:



imma not ghey [-(

[RBP]

imma not ghey [-(

Offering to have a man ride your cock puts you at least in 'curious' category. :lol:

[Teh One Who Knocks]

WTF you cant have a personal opinion.

No :hand:

[Hal-9000]

Offering to have a man ride your cock puts you at least in 'curious' category. :lol:

:x

he'd be riding me and that makes him the ghey party...sheesh, read the context ffs :lol:

[Godfather]

Blatantly stole this post:


Despite what everybody's arguing about, this isn't about an opinion. Everybody could have guessed his opinion.

This is about business. A&E suspended his contract to help maintain what they felt was their brand integrity (as is their complete right).

GQ (who asked the question) was just doing their job by lighting a fuse they suspected to be there in order to sell magazines (and they were right.)

GLAAD responded in kind as a group who's job it is to respond to public discretions and opinions that their supporters would deem insulting. They were just doing their job, too.

The only person who failed at their job was Phil. As a contracted representative of both Duck Dynasty and the A&E brand, Phil made the choice between speaking his mind and upholding his contract. He spoke his mind and is feeling the consequences for it.

This is how Capitalism works in the entertainment industry, people. It's not new. It's as American as Apple Pie.... and bigotry.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

That would be fine except for the part about GLAAD doing their job, they are a bunch of militant gays that goes after conservative or religious people because they hate those people. Where was GLAAD after Alec Baldwin called the paparazzi homosexual slurs? Oh that's right, Baldwin is a flaming liberal, so he gets a pass from GLAAD. You either criticize everyone, or no one, you can't have it both ways. GLAAD is nothing more than a hate group disguised as a gay rights organization.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Plus, how does whoever made that post know what was in Phil's contract concerning conduct? It's pure speculation on his/her part.

[Godfather]

I agree on the GLAAD thing, I have as much sentiment towards them as PETA, but didn't want to truncate that quote as I thought it hit home in terms of the bottom line.

Here's kind of my thought. I don't care about about his opinions or whether or not he's back on the show. But what if he had made similar remarks about interracial marriage or blacks in general? About Jews or Arabs? About women? I bet there would be far fewer people stepping up and defending him (for instance because his views are said to be biblical or holy).

It isn't even a free speech question in my eyes. He almost definitely signed a contract that gave the show's producers ultimate power over all aspects of the show. It isn't as if he is being arrested for starting an anti-gay protest on his own time. The only thing A&E cares about is ratings and profits; they can do whatever they want with their product.

This is just a convenient narrative for the last bastion holding out against gay rights.

[Hal-9000]

What I don't like is how other shows can run rampant with their views and slurs and actions (thinking of Snookie and her crew) and no one bats an eye...

this guy states his opinion ...not sure if it was on the show or outside of it...and gets crucified by GLAAD

I believe that GLAAD has a good mission statement trying to stop the bullying and harassment of gays in society, but in this case they can't tell people what to think...we still have the right to opinion

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Here's kind of my thought. I don't care about about his opinions or whether or not he's back on the show. But what if he had made similar remarks about interracial marriage or blacks in general? About Jews or Arabs? About women? I bet there would be far fewer people stepping up and defending him (for instance because his views are said to be biblical or holy).

And so what if he had? What do the comments of one person mean to me in the great scheme of things? Absolutely nothing. We have black people, some prominent in the entertainment and political fields, putting down white people, either directly or indirectly, yet you never hear anyone say anything about that. You have militant gays putting down anyone that dares not share their views and agenda, but you never hear anyone say anything about that.

One thing I can't stand is a double standard and that's what this is plain and simple. GLAAD is a hate group and they need to STFU and go worry about real threats, not ones they manufacture.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

What I don't like is how other shows can run rampant with their views and slurs and actions (thinking of Snookie and her crew) and no one bats an eye...

this guy states his opinion ...not sure if it was on the show or outside of it...and gets crucified by GLAAD

I believe that GLAAD has a good mission statement trying to stop the bullying and harassment of gays in society, but in this case they can't tell people what to think...we still have the right to opinion

It was an interview for GQ magazine, it didnt even happen on the show

[RBP]

Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them?

Last night, GQ released a story about Duck Dynasty which quotes Phil’s thoughts about homosexuality:

“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

As you can imagine, everyone had an opinion about this statement, including GLAAD and Phil’s check-signer, A&E, who suspended the star indefinitely.

One of the conservative tweeters I follow—one of those Christians convinced that Obama is going to have him killed for his faith—lives for stuff like this. He quickly took to the Twitterverse and posted a side-by-side image of Pope Francis and Phil, with the following caption: “Both preach truth on homosexual sin. One is TIME’s Person of the Year. The other JUST GOT FIRED.”

The point is worth considering. Even though Phil used crass, juvenile language to articulate his point, what he was getting at was his belief that homosexual “desire” is unnatural, and inherently disordered. This opinion isn’t unique to Phil. It’s actually shared by a majority of his fans.

It’s also shared, to some extent, by the Pope. Yes, that Pope—the one on the cover not just of TIME but also of The Advocate.

Of course, The Advocate knows the Pope’s thoughts on LGBT issues, including marriage equality. But as they note, Francis’ “stark change in rhetoric from his two predecessors” has set a positive example for how religious people ought to treat LGBT persons—an example that Phil, an elder at the White’s Ferry Road Church of Christ, ought to have followed in his GQ interview.

To compare Papa Duck to Papa Francis, as conservatives are doing, is, in my opinion, to misrepresent both of them. Francis, though he privately holds to certain doctrine which some might see as “anti-gay,” has not used any of his public speaking opportunities to share these with the world. Instead, Francis has repeatedly offered grace to the LGBT community. At one point, he even uttered what might go down as the expression of public humility that singlehandedly saved the Church: “Who am I to judge?”

Phil, on the other hand, went on record as rhetorically asking how any man could ever enjoy gay intercourse, since vaginal intercourse is better. (Which certainly makes you wonder how he’s able to make the comparison.)

There are two notable differences between the Pope’s views on sex, and Phil’s. First, the Pope is a trained philosopher, and has undoubtedly spent countless hours examining, challenging, and refining his views. Phil—if we are to take his brief statements on homosexuality as representative of his position—seems to hold a view on sex that manages to reduce the entire orthodox understanding of “desire” down to nothing more than a juvenile “tooshie = bad, vagina = good.”

The second difference has to do with tone. In fairness to Phil, the tone of his off-the-cuff statements may not accurately represent his philosophy on this issue, but I do think it’s a fair representation of what many see as his southern charm. There’s a way to disagree with majority opinion without coming across as disagreeable. The Pope knows how to do this. Phil does not. As a result, we respect Papa, and shame Phil.

For the record, I’m undecided on whether or not I think Phil actually is homophobic, although I certainly think his statement was offensive, and not only to the LGBT community. But I also think that if I were to spend a day calling ducks with Phil, I’d probably end up liking him—even in spite of his position on gay men. It’s quite possible to throw one’s political support behind traditional, heterosexual marriage, and yet not be bigoted.

I’m reminded of something Bill Maher said during the height of the Paula Deen controversy: “Do we always have to make people go away?” I think the question applies in this situation, too.

Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them? One of the biggest pop culture icons of today just took center stage to “educate” us about sexuality. I see this as an opportunity to further the discussion, to challenge his limited understanding of human desire, to engage with him and his rather sizeable audience—most of whom, by the way, probably share his views—and to rise above the endless sea of tweet-hate to help move our LGBT conversations to where they need to go.

GK Chesterton said that bigotry is “an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.” If he is right—and he usually is—then I wonder if the Duck Dynasty fiasco says more about our bigotry than Phil’s.

Brandon Ambrosino is a writer and professional dancer based in Baltimore.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/19/the-duck-dynasty-fiasco-says-more-about-our-bigotry-than-phils/

[PorkChopSandwiches]

I bet this whole thing was an opportunity to make a publicity stunt and A&E jumped on it. This shit has been headlining on DrudgeReport, they will have record numbers for the next episodes I bet.

[RBP]

they will have record numbers for the next episodes I bet.

They will, but I think it's for a different reason. People will tune in for the same reason Chik-fil-A had record sales after GLAAD went after them. People are sick of it.