Brokeback Mountain star 'rebuked' for staring [Archive]

Sampiro

03-03-2006, 12:40 AM

According to this article (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/entertainment/2005-664.html) about Santa Fe native Michelle Williams (and this is an exact cut & paste quote)

School rejects ex-pupil for staring in Brokeback Mountain

I think this is absolutely ridiculous. Sure, she stared in the movie, but then so did practically every other actor. Sometimes if you don't have dialogue and your character really doesn't know what to make of something as her character doesn't when she learns about her husband's affair, it's only natural that you would stare. It doesn't mean you're a terrible actress, just that you choose to underplay the scene. If the school can't get around her choice to stare rather than ham it up, then screw them.

Sampiro

03-03-2006, 12:49 AM

Oh, okay... never mind.

It wasn't just for staring, it was the gay stuff, according to this article (http://www.wsoctv.com/entertainment/7622565/detail.html) and some other ones.

Santa Fe Christian was proud of Michelle Williams when she performed in "Tom Sawyer" and other family plays at their school -- but the headmaster disapproves of her being in "Brokeback Mountain."

...

"I hope we offered her something in life. But she made the kinds of choices of which we wouldn't approve," Hopson told the Union Tribune. "'Brokeback Mountain' basically promotes a lifestyle we don't promote. It's not the word of God."

That's bad too, I guess.

I wonder... if Huck had spit on his dick and given to Tom right there on the raft, I wonder if they'd have been proud.

Nah, I doubt it. Since Mark Twain was by all accounts a devout and God fearing Christian (http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/twain/index.htm) atheist-author it probably fit in with the school's values, and other than swearing and underage smoking and benefitting from a stolen treasure and murder and alcoholism Tom Sawyer has no objectionable themes.

Maybe Michelle will see (or at least stare at) the Light and henceforth do only good Christian word-of-God movies like Left Behind IV: The Anti-Christ Gets Bar Mitzvahed or Francis Ford Coppola's Billy Graham's Paul Crouch's Lew Wallace's BEN HUR 2: A TALE OF THE CHRIST'S SECOND COMING and such, or just start a sock puppet ministry ("This is Sockular Humanism boys and girls, and he's gonna go after our friend Miss Holey Hose!") and return to righteousness.

Or not.

Either way I must apologize, I'm in a slightly sillier mood than usual where this type of crap is concerned. But we can all agree it's because of the weather and the frigging Illuminati.

duffer

03-03-2006, 12:53 AM

I was trying to figure out what she was staring at. Then I realized it was supposed to be "starring". Then I realized it was a less than a non-biased source.

So what? It's a private religious school. The Headmaster doesn't condone the content and asked her not to return. So don't go. Shun the school for not bending to pressure. If there's something illegal about it, let me know. Otherwise grow up and understand not everyone will bend to your will.

Getting worked up over this is no different than if the Headmaster tried to ban gay pride parades. And I'm sure we know that would go over like a fart in church.

Diogenes the Cynic

03-03-2006, 12:55 AM

Sampiro

03-03-2006, 12:59 AM

Who said it was illegal? This is a PALATR thread.

What means this... PALATR please?

Larry Mudd

03-03-2006, 12:59 AM

"Nothing she's done as an actress has bothered me," Carla Williams told the Union Tribune.

A Montana native, Michelle Williams has also starred in such films as "Halloween: H:2O" and "The Station Agent."So.... Righteous (http://www.horrorshirts.com/images/PAGE5/hsh20cd2.jpg). Wicked (http://movies.themoviebox.net/images/brokebackmountain/main.jpg).

Glad that's cleared up.

Diogenes the Cynic

03-03-2006, 01:00 AM

What means this... PALATR please?
Point and laugh at the retards.

duffer

03-03-2006, 01:02 AM

Point and laugh at the retards.

Oh, a bitch session. Sorry for intruding. I just wish the OP's in these things would state that only posts ranting about the link were welcome. I'm still learning after all this time. :smack:

Diogenes the Cynic

03-03-2006, 01:13 AM

Oh, a bitch session. Sorry for intruding. I just wish the OP's in these things would state that only posts ranting about the link were welcome. I'm still learning after all this time. :smack:
I don't see where the OP said that opposing views weren't welcome. It's a rant about douchebaggery but I didn't see where he claimed there was anything illegal or about it or that anyone should stop it.

Sampiro

03-03-2006, 01:36 AM

Well, technically the OP was about a typo I found amusing. The second part was just a standard "What a frigging maroon".

My high school principal- true story, one of those "I wouldn't make it up because it sounds too made up"- was a good ol' boy Larry-the-Cable-Guy-in-a-cheap-suit clone who also coached the football team (of course) and who called me "Mrs. [English Teacher's] little sissy friend" and made God knows how many homophobic jokes that I mainly resented because they were just frigging stupid. (One time he went into some idiot diatribe about how "and lemme tell you this 'bout the marijuana... it does something to your wrist... makes it go real limp like this..." and then he prounced around in a queer accent saying something about 'I cain't find my little purse to put my poetry book in'. It was one of those "WTF does that even mean?" moments.

Anyway, a few years after I graduated his youngest son, Sonny, graduated. Sonny was practically born wearing a tiara- Buffy & Jodie and Mr. French never knew such a Sissy- but his dad put him on the football team (where he excelled) and the baseball team (where he excelled) and he got a scholarship to some state college to play baseball, so his dad had no doubts that Sonny was straight as they come, cause queers can't even play baseball let alone enjoy it. Sonny and his dad had a strained relationship, but Sonny did manage to graduate salutatorian.

In his speech at graduation (this is confirmed by several people who were there) he thanked God and the people he loved most: "My mama... my daddy... and my boyfriend, Dennis". His father LITERALLY had to have an ambulance give him oxygen.

It didn't end pretty. He disowned the kid, he and his wife got a divorce over it, the kid lost his baseball scholarship over it, etc., but last heard he and his dad have a semi relationship and he got through college on his own and is a counsellor now.

The point is... well, I guess the point is that I have a story about a homophobic high school principal, and while not related to the OP really it is a good one (and quite true).

Larry Mudd

03-03-2006, 01:53 AM

His father LITERALLY had to have an ambulance give him oxygen.Sissy.

Dr. Rieux

03-03-2006, 02:15 AM

Which "lifestyle we don't promote" would that be? Staying miserable in an unhappy marriage and living in fear because of prejudice?
:rolleyes:

sturmhauke

03-03-2006, 02:27 AM

Good Lord, Sampiro, you have simultaneously the most fucked up and funniest stories to tell. I would pay good money to see that principal's freakout live.

Shirley Ujest

03-03-2006, 06:10 AM

In his speech at graduation (this is confirmed by several people who were there) he thanked God and the people he loved most: "My mama... my daddy... and my boyfriend, Dennis". His father LITERALLY had to have an ambulance give him oxygen.

HAH!

Good on the son!

Thanks for sharing, Sampiro!

Walter Windchill

03-03-2006, 06:51 AM

That's a great story, Sampiro.

eleanorigby

03-03-2006, 07:04 AM

I LOOOOOVE the smell of hypocrisy in the mornin'!

Good mornin' Santa Fe!

Thanks for the story, Sampiro --it's funny now, but it all must have hurt horribly at the time.

Kimstu

03-03-2006, 07:19 AM

Anyway, a few years after I graduated his youngest son, Sonny, graduated. Sonny was practically born wearing a tiara [...] Sonny and his dad had a strained relationship, but Sonny did manage to graduate salutatorian.

In his speech at graduation (this is confirmed by several people who were there) he thanked God and the people he loved most: "My mama... my daddy... and my boyfriend, Dennis"

Lucky Dennis, having a boyfriend with solid brass balls the size of coconuts! More mad props for Sonny here. Oh, and props for Michelle Williams and her mom, too.

May I take this opportunity to express my "WTF?" at the following opinion expressed by Ms. Williams' former principal?

"But she made the kinds of choices of which we wouldn't approve," Hopson told the Union Tribune. "'Brokeback Mountain' basically promotes a lifestyle we don't promote."

This is the same "WTF?" response I had back when people complained that the movie "Thelma and Louise" promoted bad values because the two lead characters shot a guy and then ran off together and committed more crimes, etc. I'm all like "But it didn't end so well, did it? I mean, the chicks had half the cops in three states chasing them down and then drove off a cliff and DIED! How can you say that these actions are being rewarded or condoned?"

Similarly, I don't see how anybody can interpret "Brokeback Mountain" as "promoting a gay lifestyle". The story's a love tragedy, for gawd's sake, and the protagonists are emphatically not leading " a gay lifestyle" for most of their lives. The end result is mostly misery and murder. I would have thought the homophobes would have been cheering and sending their church youth groups in droves to watch this flick. "See? This is how letting 'teh gay' into your life can make you unhappy forever and ruin your marriage and get you killed!"

Apparently as far as the homophobes are concerned, merely recognizing that gay people are human beings with emotional depth and the capacity to love sincerely is equivalent to "promoting a gay lifestyle." :rolleyes:

(And I think the OP is spot on about Michelle Williams staring in the movie. If I caught my husband getting it on with another guy, I'd be staring too. ;))

stegon66

03-03-2006, 08:04 AM

I saw this story earlier. So they're upset that their precious has starred in a gay-themed movie?

A Montana native, Michelle Williams has also starred in such films as "Halloween: H:2O" and "The Station Agent."

And also If These Walls Could Talk 2, wherein Ms. Williams played a lesbian and engaged in nude love scenes with Chloe Sevigny and we all know what she's done. Maybe we should the school a copy?

tdn

03-03-2006, 08:23 AM

'I cain't find my little purse to put my poetry book in'.
Pure. Comedy. Gold.

Ensign Edison

03-03-2006, 08:39 AM

I wonder... if Huck had spit on his dick and given to Tom right there on the raft, I wonder if they'd have been proud.

You just know there's a fan community for this somewhere on livejournal.

...("This is Sockular Humanism boys and girls, and he's gonna go after our friend Miss Holey Hose!") and return to righteousness.

And that.

I woke up this morning and said 'I think I'm ready to renounce my religion now, but I'll see how the day goes' and the first thing I read is this. That's it. God clearly wants me to worship the internet.

BubbaDog

03-03-2006, 08:47 AM

The news source must have a Sampiro fan. They fixed the typo.

audiobottle

03-03-2006, 08:57 AM

The news source must have a Sampiro fan. They fixed the typo.

Yeah, which made the OP very, very confusing. But no worries, I figured it out after a few reads, a few minutes, a few What the hell?s...

Jonathan Chance

03-03-2006, 08:59 AM

<pointless pedant for which I apologize but it's not a really serious thread anyways...>

AGH! Huck and Tom weren't on the raft!
</ppfwiabinarsta...>

Now if it were Jim giving it to him...

Equipoise

03-03-2006, 01:10 PM

I saw Brokeback Mountain yesterday for the 5th time, and there is a scene where she stares. It's the morning after Ennis and Jack have been out all night. She's sitting at the kitchen table and is staring out at nothing. She "wakes up" when she hears Jack's truck pull up. They didn't like that scene? It makes me ache for her. If the school is going to reject her because of that then they're just stupid!

The thing I like about the Michelle Williams story is that you have to hope that at least a few kids at the school are going to look at Michelle: how nice and kind and well-adjusted she turned out to be; that she's made a good career for herself; has a good family; is nominated for an Academy Award; and has probably made more money than the headmaster has made in his lifetime while not doing anything too shameful for it (I can't blame young actors for doing horror films for the paycheck), and then they'll look at the headmaster, who's being dickish toward Michelle just for appearing in a movie, and they're going to think "well, if he's SO wrong about Michelle, maybe he's wrong about the gay thing" and their minds will be opened. Question authority! Watch Saved! Support Michelle!

Loud-mouthed phobes always shoot themselves in the foot.

In any case, he's probably very aware that many students have already seen Brokeback Mountain just because Michelle was in it, and he's mad about that. They've probably watched Saved! too.

Similarly, I don't see how anybody can interpret "Brokeback Mountain" as "promoting a gay lifestyle". The story's a love tragedy, for gawd's sake, and the protagonists are emphatically not leading " a gay lifestyle" for most of their lives. The end result is mostly misery and murder. I would have thought the homophobes would have been cheering and sending their church youth groups in droves to watch this flick. "See? This is how letting 'teh gay' into your life can make you unhappy forever and ruin your marriage and get you killed!"

Apparently as far as the homophobes are concerned, merely recognizing that gay people are human beings with emotional depth and the capacity to love sincerely is equivalent to "promoting a gay lifestyle."

I've thought the same thing. Thank you for putting it into words better than I could.

It didn't end pretty. He disowned the kid, he and his wife got a divorce over it, the kid lost his baseball scholarship over it, etc.,

WTF?? They pulled his baseball scholarship because Sonny was gay? When was this? Someone needed to throw lawyers at that school.

Good story.

matt_mcl

03-03-2006, 01:22 PM

WTF?? They pulled his baseball scholarship because Sonny was gay? When was this? Someone needed to throw lawyers at that school.

May have been while that was still legal, which AFAIK it still is in much of the US. It wasn't illegal everywhere here until Vriend v. Alberta in 1998.

Plynck

03-03-2006, 01:53 PM

School rejects ex-pupil for staring...Ex-pupil? Ugh. How can you stare without pupils?

kaylasdad99

03-03-2006, 02:07 PM

<pointless pedant for which I apologize but it's not a really serious thread anyways...>

AGH! Huck and Tom weren't on the raft!
</ppfwiabinarsta...>

Now if it were Jim giving it to him...I don't have a copy of the book handy, but how did Tom and Huck and Jeff get to and from the island where they did their little campout, by rowboat?

And what about the trip to the island with the Treasure cave? I'm pretty sure they didn't swim back with that strongbox.

faithfool

03-03-2006, 02:16 PM

I doubt Michelle will be worried that they won't "allow/let" her come back. I'm sure that was high priority on her list of things to do.

Now, the school is all in a twit about fiction, but I suppose they overlooked her out-of-wedlock child and the whole living-in-sin thing. :rolleyes:

All I can hope is that if she wins on Oscar night is that she'll be like Sonny. :D

scout1222

03-03-2006, 04:13 PM

I would just like to nitpick and say that Santa Fe Christian school is NOT in Santa Fe. It is in San Diego county.

http://www2.sfcs.net/

(Just because a couple of you have been assuming that the city she lived in was actually called Santa Fe. And because I know her dad Larry, who is a fucking laugh riot.)

Cliffy

03-03-2006, 05:51 PM

And because I know her dad Larry, who is a fucking laugh riot.)
Neat. Tell him that the sight of his daughter singing to Richard Nixon's tape recorder still ranks as about the most wonderful thing I've ever seen in my life.

--Cliffy

TJdude825

03-04-2006, 11:18 AM

WTF?? They pulled his baseball scholarship because Sonny was gay? When was this? Someone needed to throw lawyers at that school.

Good story. Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Maybe the scholarship required his parents to submit some paperwork or something, and they refused. That's quite shitty in any case.

Similarly, I don't see how anybody can interpret "Brokeback Mountain" as "promoting a gay lifestyle". The story's a love tragedy, for gawd's sake, and the protagonists are emphatically not leading " a gay lifestyle" for most of their lives. The end result is mostly misery and murder. I would have thought the homophobes would have been cheering and sending their church youth groups in droves to watch this flick. "See? This is how letting 'teh gay' into your life can make you unhappy forever and ruin your marriage and get you killed!"

Apparently as far as the homophobes are concerned, merely recognizing that gay people are human beings with emotional depth and the capacity to love sincerely is equivalent to "promoting a gay lifestyle." :rolleyes: You seem to think that these people actually WATCHED the movie. On The Colbert Report (a parody of shows like The O'Reilly Factor) recently, they showed clips of several conservative people talking negatively about the movie, but all including the words, "I haven't SEEN the movie." So many homophobes (though to be fair, probably not all of them) are judging the movie based on hearsay.

Revtim

03-04-2006, 11:34 AM

Who said it was illegal? This is a PALATR thread.There's some kind of Godwinesque internet law that PALATR threads like these have to have somebody tossing out the "that's not illegal!" or "that's protected free speech!" canards, even when the OP neither says nor even remotely implies otherwise.

I'd call it "Revtim's Law", but I'm already trying to get that to refer to the rule that whenever there's a "is this photo real?" thread there are always people posting "that's the WORST photoshopping I've ever seen!" or the like, even when the photo is completely unaltered and 100 percent genuine.

Excalibre

03-04-2006, 01:47 PM

So what? It's a private religious school. The Headmaster doesn't condone the content and asked her not to return. So don't go. Shun the school for not bending to pressure. If there's something illegal about it, let me know. Otherwise grow up and understand not everyone will bend to your will.

Getting worked up over this is no different than if the Headmaster tried to ban gay pride parades. And I'm sure we know that would go over like a fart in church.
Um, what's your point, duffer? No one acted as though the school was violating the law, or ought to be stopped. Sampiro merely pointed out that the school's administration is acting like a bunch of morons. I know you feel the need to defend these people, as they're your co-partisans and you're nothing if not a kneejerk lunatic, but really - do you honestly believe the school is doing something good or right here? You sure haven't made a case for it.

Or are we not even supposed to talk about it when one of your political allies does something so embarrassingly stupid? Are you upset here because you're getting yet another reminder that yes, these are the people whose side you're on, and yes, they're complete idiots and malicious ones at that?

Since Sampiro didn't even suggest that the school's rights should be abrogated and they should be forced to admit a student they don't want, your argument against it either suggests that you're a drooling moron who launches into diatribes for no reason or you're deviously trying to prevent any actual discussion of the issues by starting some argument that has nothing to do with the situation at hand. It's tough to decide. But you've never come across to me as clever enough to be devious.

I wonder... if Huck had spit on his dick and given to Tom right there on the raft, I wonder if they'd have been proud.
Hot! You know that was in his original draft, right? Also, before the publisher made him change the name, he wrote a little novel called [i]A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Pants[i].

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Maybe the scholarship required his parents to submit some paperwork or something, and they refused. That's quite shitty in any case.
No offense, but why do you think a scholarship couldn't be taken away because the kid was gay? If the scholarship is being given by a state school, then chances are the school has a nondiscrimination policy that extends to gay people. (A school in the south, however many years ago the story took place, is another story.) And if it's a private scholarship, or a private school, then it might well not have such a policy. You're not under the impression that any serious legal protections exist to prevent discrimination against queers in the United States, are you?

In case this level of ignorance (no offense - it can only be cured by knowledge) exists over gay rights, you should understand that I could easily be fired for being gay, or tossed out of my house. Gay people in most parts of the U.S. have very little legal protection against discrimination.

There's some kind of Godwinesque internet law that PALATR threads like these have to have somebody tossing out the "that's not illegal!" or "that's protected free speech!" canards, even when the OP neither says nor even remotely implies otherwise.
We can count on duffer to always spew some sort of nonsense like that. I think the real situation is that he's trying to yell at us for disagreeing with him, but he knows that won't fly. So instead he makes a silly argument against something that was never actually said.

duffer

03-04-2006, 04:27 PM

We can count on duffer to always spew some sort of nonsense like that. I think the real situation is that he's trying to yell at us for disagreeing with him, but he knows that won't fly. So instead he makes a silly argument against something that was never actually said.

This has already been covered dipshit. Awhile ago. :rolleyes:

Sampiro

03-04-2006, 05:34 PM

...recently, they showed clips of several conservative people talking negatively about the movie, but all including the words, "I haven't SEEN the movie." So many homophobes (though to be fair, probably not all of them) are judging the movie based on hearsay.

I love Wolcott's take on Medved's take (http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2006/01/the_mountain_co.php) on the movie. (How did Medved go from being a guy who wrote frothy little books on bad movies to being the total dipwad finger pointing jerk that he is now, incidentally?)

Short version: Medved originally said "I''m very proud that conservatives have not taken up the cudgels against Brokeback Mountain. There's a recognition that most of the people on whom they could have any influence are not going to see this movie, anyway." When he found out he'd missed the loop to get in on the most talked about movie in years he of course took up the cudgel and among other things claims it's success was due to the fact it was "falsely advertised". ('Damn baby! I thought this was gone be a movie about a crippled fella takin' up mountain climbin' and they's two guys a goin' at it like one was a fee-male!")

Excalibre

03-04-2006, 07:20 PM

This has already been covered dipshit. Awhile ago. :rolleyes:
:rolleyes: indeed - since you still don't seem to have apologized for (or hell, even acknowledged) your mind-bending stupidity in this thread, it's clear that it has not been covered.

By the way, your insult might sting a bit more if you hadn't forgotten the comma. Or used "awhile" to mean "a while". It's funny that in your constant efforts to make an ass of yourself whenever your gay-hating (and so forth) redneck cohorts are attacked, you manage to evade criticism for your simian level of literacy. I guess the content is so astonishingly stupid, no one ever has time to get around to the form.

duffer, do you ever get tired of embarrassing your own side? I mean, every time you talk, you manage to make those who share your politics look stupider. I guess that makes you the opposite of Sam Stone or Bricker. Don't get me wrong - I'm glad you're around. If it weren't for the numerous right-wingers like yourself with their heads appropriately filled with oatmeal, I might forget and start thinking that Bricker represented mainstream right-wing thought, and forget that semi-literate reactionaries like yourself are the actual mainstream of the U.S. Republican party.

Slacker

03-04-2006, 09:39 PM

Can anyone Lexis-Nexis the actual text from the San Diego newspaper where the principal made his comment? Not to defend the guy, but I'd be interested to know how his little statement was delivered. Did the paper seek him out for a comment, or did he find a microphone to talk into and let 'er rip himself?

JeffB

03-04-2006, 10:07 PM

From the San Diego Union-Tribune (3/1/06):
Headline:Mother swells with pride for Oscar-nominated child; Solana Beach school unhappy with her roles

Carla Williams raised a daughter her way -- a comfortable North County home, elementary and middle school at Solana Beach's Santa Fe Christian where, according to its credo, "the Bible is the standard upon which the educational program is based," and acting classes at the "family entertainment"-oriented Christian Youth Theater.

<snip>

A provocative film about two cowboys in Wyoming whose friendship becomes a romance, "Brokeback Mountain" is a long way from the rigorous religious precepts of Santa Fe Christian and the G-rated productions of "The Sound of Music" at CYT. Nevertheless, Carla Williams is ecstatic about her daughter's success: "She's sweet, she has a heart, I'm so proud of her."

Not so proud is Santa Fe Christian headmaster Jim Hopson. "We don't want to have anything to do with her in relation to that movie," said Hopson, who turned down a request from a Union-Tribune reporter to visit the school and chat with students about the movies and one of their own being up for an Academy Award.

"Michelle doesn't represent the values of this institution. We would not approve of her movies and TV shows (including the teen drama "Dawson's Creek"). We'd not like to be tied to `Brokeback Mountain.'

"I hope we offered her something in life. But she made the kinds of choices of which we wouldn't approve. `Brokeback Mountain' basically promotes a lifestyle we don't promote. It's not the word of God."

Carla Williams was nestled in an office at Christian Community Theater's headquarters in El Cajon (CYT is a component of CCT) with her friends Sheryl and Paul Russell, who founded the organization 25 years ago. They listened quietly as Hopson's words were read to them.

"He never knew her," said Williams, with a lovingly assembled scrapbook of Michelle in front of her. "For some people, `Brokeback Mountain' is difficult. He has the right to his opinion."

Some Santa Fe Christian staff and faculty members, Williams said, have called to congratulate her and Michelle. One longtime school employee told her, "You tell Michelle how much I love her."

<snip>From the way the story is written, I'm guessing the reporter contacted the school about visiting and that's when Hopson gave his quote.

duffer

03-04-2006, 11:49 PM

:rolleyes: indeed - since you still don't seem to have apologized for (or hell, even acknowledged) your mind-bending stupidity in this thread, it's clear that it has not been covered.

By the way, your insult might sting a bit more if you hadn't forgotten the comma. Or used "awhile" to mean "a while". It's funny that in your constant efforts to make an ass of yourself whenever your gay-hating (and so forth) redneck cohorts are attacked, you manage to evade criticism for your simian level of literacy. I guess the content is so astonishingly stupid, no one ever has time to get around to the form.

Well, I guess I must keep posting to this thread even when it was implicit that I had nothing to offer.

I apologize Excalibre. To you, and you alone, I apologize. Personally. Since you, and you alone, seem to need it for your well-being, I apologize. I shall now go flog myself for offending your sensibilities.

*ouch!*

There. Better now?

And I knew once I hit submit that you, and you alone, would bring up the omitted comma. And for that I can only offer an apology. I apologize. To you, and you alone. I'm truly sorry for that. I can't beleive I made such a gaffe.

Gay-hating?!? Fuck you. Funny you're the only one that sees that little gem. If you have such a fucking problem with me, say so. Quit being a little turd. Whatever my stance is, it's mostly consistant. And when it isn't consistant it means I've either changed my view or decided that it was too inflammitory to keep it going and allowed more articulate Dopers to say what I mean to.

Fuck you for placing this tag on me. Fuck you.

Excalibre

03-05-2006, 12:25 AM

Gay-hating?!? Fuck you. Funny you're the only one that sees that little gem. If you have such a fucking problem with me, say so. Quit being a little turd. Whatever my stance is, it's mostly consistant. And when it isn't consistant it means I've either changed my view or decided that it was too inflammitory to keep it going and allowed more articulate Dopers to say what I mean to.

Fuck you for placing this tag on me. Fuck you.
Excuse me? You are defending homophobic trash here. You do remember, right? That's what you jumped into this thread to do. To leap to the defense of the poor, beknighted homophobes when us mean ol' liberals ganged up on them.

Why were you defending them if not because you have some sympathy for their views, hmm? As I and others have pointed out, there's simply no basis to suggest that their rights are being in any way attacked here. In fact, no one even suggested that we should attack their right to admit whoever they wished. Sampiro just pointed out that they were idiotic jackasses for doing it.

And you leapt in to protest. Because it's not okay, in your book, for the rest of us to even disagree with the jackasses running that school and their decision to kick a student out for appearing in a film with gay subject matter. You leapt right in to defend them, because it bothered you oh-so-much that someone might have been pitted for being a homophobic jackass.

Why, duffer, did that bother you? You practically tripped over your feet in your rush to stand up for these homophobic jackasses. Why did you feel the need to do that?

The only idea I have is that you feel some sympathy for their beliefs. If you can explain why you actually chose to stand up for them, I'd love to hear why. But spare me the self-righteous martyr act until you do.

And don't forget that this little turd was your last contribution to the thread:
Oh, a bitch session. Sorry for intruding. I just wish the OP's in these things would state that only posts ranting about the link were welcome. I'm still learning after all this time.
Hardly the sort of gracious explanation that might have been expected if you'd (somehow) misread the OP as calling for the school to be disbanded (or whatever fevered paranoia was gripping you). Nope, just a typical display of duffer feeling sorry for himself because his views were not "welcome".

What, pray tell, are those unwelcome views, hmm? Since you've done such a good job whining about your opinions being unwelcome, what are those opinions? Because if your views had simply been, "Gosh, that guy's a jackass! But he sure has the legal right to act like one!", then golly gee - they might have been unnecessary (given that no one but you brought up the law in this entire thread), but you surely would have been welcome to share them.

See, that's the thing - either you weren't being viciously oppressed for your views, or you were bringing up the sort of views one might expect you to be oppressed for (i.e. sympathy for these homophobic jackasses.) I guess I'm not buying into your little pity party because I still haven't come up with a third alternative, and oddly enough, neither have you.

duffer

03-05-2006, 01:16 AM

Excalibre

03-05-2006, 01:23 AM

Well, I don't see how it was a pity party. I don't recall anything I posted that was "anti-gay" and I don't understand where all the invective is coming from. Maybe if someone more reasonable can tell me I was so insensitive and point it out, I'll consider it.

Right now, it just seems like you want to start something with me. If that's the case, you're in for a long fight. Or a short one as you're so far out of the realm of reality that I don't think anyone could reach you.
So tell me, duffer. Can you answer my question? Once again, I'll ask: Why did you immediately leap to the defense of these homophobic assholes? Hmm? Why did you feel the need to jump right into the thread to stand up for them?

Go paly with the children. The grown-ups are discussing stuff.
:rolleyes: That's awful rich.

Punk.
But that just makes it better.

Miller

03-05-2006, 01:32 AM

Actually, I was kind of curious about that, too, duffer. I'm not trying to attack you (for once), I just didn't understand where you were coming from at all in your first post, and your second just confused me even more. You seemed surprised that it was just a "bitch session." What did you originally think the point of the thread was?

Sampiro

03-05-2006, 02:38 AM

May have been while that was still legal, which AFAIK it still is in much of the US.

This was in Alabama and not at one of the bigger universities. It's still legal to deny a student admission even to the university itself for being gay, and while it hasn't been enforced in many years it has been actively defeated when students and faculty tried to add orientation to the non-discrimination policy.

I work at the largest university in the state. The Board of Regents was petitioned last week to have a hearing on adding orientation to the non-discrimination policy for faculty and staff. They refused to have a hearing about it. This doesn't mean that there aren't openly gay faculty and staff (I'm one and I know of several more), but if any of us were ever fired strictly because our new dean or whatever was Baptist or because the state legislature said to (and while that sounds farfetched, this man (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/005904.html) is a legislator from the same county as the University. It could perhaps be challenged on the basis of Lawrence v. Texas if somebody were fired for orientation, but victory would be far from certain.

Anyway, sorry for the digression, but the point is that while this would have been in the late 80s when that was done a lot more often they still could do it in compliance with university policies and state law, and even in 2006 when it isn't enforced at the moment, it would still be imprudent for an openly gay player to join a baseball team at a small college. (The last isn't just an Alabama thing or even a regional thing).