Culture

Media Attacks on HGTV's Gaines Family and Victoria's Secret Might Make You Welcome Trump's Apocalypse

Casually labeling too many as racist, sexist bigots-sometimes for good reason, other times not so much-had something to do with Trump's election in the first place.

|

VS
Alain Benainous/ACE Pictures/Newscom

We are the architects of our own suffering. A writer for Cosmopolitan is claiming that Victoria's Secret has engaged in "racist" cultural appropriation because the company recently featured Asian-inspired lingerie in its fashion show.

The post's title states the matter plainly: "Why Can't Victoria's Secret Stop Designing Racist Lingerie?" asks Helin Jung. (The answer is obvious: because it's not doing so in first place.)

In the esteemed view of a progressive women's magazine, it's racist to let a Nepalese woman design South Asian-inspired jewelry for Victoria's Secret models to wear on the runaway.

"Don't let yourself be hoodwinked by Victoria's Secret's brazen attempt to re-label what is clearly cultural appropriation by turning it into a celebration of 'culture,'" writes Jung. "The brand and its creative leads shamelessly cherry-picked imagery, breaking apart aesthetic references from wherever they wanted and stitching them back together again. They're telling us it's worldliness. It's not, it's a hack job."

If this is racism—if racism means, essentially, recognizing and incorporating the inherent beauty of other cultures—what word would Cosmopolitan use to describe Victoria's Secret if the company only featured designs that were 100 percent Eurocentric? Reasonable people might conclude that Cosmo is getting things exactly backward: Victoria's Secret has engaged in racial inclusivity, rather than racism.

Meanwhile, HGTV is facing criticism from BuzzFeed because the stars of one of its biggest shows—Chip and Joanna Gaines of Fixer Upper—are members of an anti-gay church. The article did not say whether the Gaines are anti-gay themselves, or whether Fixer Upper actually discriminates against gays (it has never featured a gay couple, although other HGTV shows do so routinely), because its author simply doesn't know. The views of the Gaines' pastor are, remarkably, the only evidence.

Oh, Jezebel and—you guessed it—Cosmopolitan eagerly piled on. Reminder: We don't actually know if Chip and Joanna are anti-gay, so this is sort of a premature public-shaming.

People have every right to boycott television personalities for being anti-gay, though we might expect the journalism outlets accusing them of such to actually confirm it first.

Occasionally, there are reasons to be grateful that President Donald Trump's apocalypse is only 50 days away. No doubt the smug sanctimony of media figures who casually labelled everyone a racist, sexist bigot—sometimes for good reason, other times not so much—had something to do with Trump's election in the first place.

NEXT: Brickbat: Happy Crack

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. On principle I refuse to boycott Victoria Secret Models!

    1. In the above picture, is the girl 2nd from left about to spank 3rd from left?

      Nice!

      1. Whatever works for you.

      2. I choose to think so.

      3. Well the 3rd girl is appropriating pirate culture with those boots, and that appears to be a buckskin loin cloth so she’s also appropriating native american culture. So yes, she’s bad. Very bad and naughty. So first, she must be spanked. And then…..

        1. …the oral sex?

  2. All these non-whiteys better stop wearing plaid.

    1. No more sampling white musicians/bands in hip hop. There goes Bonham’s “big beat”.

      1. -1 Billy Squier

        1. Or to be more specific , Billy Squier’s drummer, Bobby Chouinard

  3. Seems like the right thread to post a link to the chart that has replaced the Nolan chart:

    http://thefederalistpapers.int…..406137.jpg

    1. F*ing hilarious. I just appropriated that brah!

    2. That poor woman has her image forever associated with being a clueless smug liberal and for all we know she could be a perfectly level headed liberty loving person.

      1. Not wearing that hat, she’s not.

        1. That’s the worst hat I ever saw, I bet you buy a hat like that you get a free bowl of soup.

      2. As someone pointed out the last time we saw that pic, it’s a guy.

  4. I appreciate Reason spending time on pointing out the various rags out there and what they are writing about. I don’t read those rags and someone has to know how crazy the enemies of Liberty are.

    1. We really have.prime opportunity to destroy a lot of progressives. A,Erica needs to be a place where anyone with a communist agenda fears for their safety and freedom.

  5. Outrage porn.

  6. If this is racism?if racism means, essentially, recognizing and incorporating the inherent beauty of other cultures?what word would Cosmopolitan use to describe Victoria’s Secret if the company only featured designs that were 100 percent Eurocentric?

    I think we all know the answer to that. It would be racism. If someone’s livelihood is based on attacking racism, we shouldn’t be surprised that they are going to find racism in anything, up to and including peanut butter sandwiches.

    1. Peanut butter made from peanuts planted by slaves. Racist.

      1. God Bless George Washington Carver!

  7. “People have every right to boycott television personalities for being anti-gay, though we might expect the journalism outlets accusing them of such to actually confirm it first.”
    What does Cosmopolitan have to do with journalism?
    And being anti-gay is just an alternative lifestyle.
    (and alternative lifestyles should be embraced by all left leaning thinkers as I recall from the gay rights movement.)

    1. What does Cosmopolitan have to do with journalism?

      You mean, “please your man by hooking his genitals up to a car battery” articles aren’t journalism?

      1. Hey, Cosmo is at LEAST as much serious journalism as the New York Times.

    2. Grab it’s motherfucking fabulous taste in clothing!

      1. its… Bob the Angry Flower would be miffed.

    3. I wonder if Robbie supports the rights of people that boycott celebrities for being “pro-gay”?

  8. Wait until Buzzfeed finds out Chip and Jo-Jo are also opposed to adultery, greed, and sex outside of marriage. They’re going to blow the roof off this story.

  9. I had read the article on the Gaines’ on Jezebel earlier and my only take away from it was “What the fuck?” There was nothing there. They go to a church that is more conservative than one I would attend were I the church-going sort, but it is not so far out there that it’s beyond the pale and is one of the larger congregations in the area they live. It actually seems kind of journalisticly irresponsible for Buzzfeed et al to go with that line when they failed to get anything from the Gaines’ themselves or from any 3rd party directly addressing the POV of the Gaines’.

    1. See Libertarian’s link above…

    2. I am surprised at Buzzfeed. They would be safer accusing Taylor Swift of having been faithfully married to the same guy this whole time and “dating” a succession of actors to keep her career in the news. If you like a raging pack of 25-45 year old white women baying for your blood, I guess Buzzfeed nailed it.

    3. journalisticly irresponsible for Buzzfeed

      There’s your problem.

      1. Bustfeed works for me.

        But it is usually called something else.

    4. Yet these same assholes saw nothing wrong with Obama spending decades attending a church based on Marxist theology.

  10. Would, would, would, would, would, would.

    1. Is that all? Would on the blurry and obscured ones too.

      1. I think its safe to assume all those ladies would get “it”.

  11. “People have every right to boycott television personalities for being anti-gay,. . . ”

    Boycott? That is so passe. The remedy these days would be to force them to include gay couples on their TV show.

    1. Fuck, you know someone is pitching a reality show right now for the premise of a gay couple going around the country forcing people to cater to their every whim. Anyone who doesn’t want to, is forced to do so by anti-gay laws.

      All it needs is a snappy title and it will be green lit.

      1. “Using the Back Door for Goods and Services”

      2. “Submit To The Ever Changing Social Mores of Your Rulers”

    2. Wow. I’ve been boycotting the fuck out of TV personalities for being on TV. I should write a smug article about it and sell it to Buzzfeed for $8 and a 1% share of the company.

    3. BOYcott? You cis gendered shitlord!

  12. You buried the money quote Robby.

    The fact is that even as the world gets more connected, a sexist, patriarchal, mostly white corporation continues to take what it wants for its own gain. Its exploitation of these cultural references is meant to lead directly to profits. And I’m not buying it.

    From a writer working for Cosmo…..

    1. Just explain to her how she is a member of MM Enterprises and that everyone has a share.

      1. What are you doing with all that parachute silk?

    2. But enough about the DNC, what do they think about Victorias Secret?

    3. I hear that turd Olbermann is now working for GQ. After burning that bridge, I suspect he will end up at the Springfield Daily Shopper.

  13. A writer for Cosmopolitan is claiming that Victoria’s Secret has engaged in “racist” cultural appropriation because the company recently featured Asian-inspired lingerie in its fashion show.

    10 Ways To Please Your Man Without Resorting To Geisha Cosplay

    You Don’t Have To Squint To Put the Spark Back In Your Romance

    Chinese, Japanese, Dirty Knees, Is He Cheating On You? Take This Quiz To Find Out

    1. The sooner everyone starts responding to these screeches with two words and then ignoring them, the sooner it will end.

    2. “You Don’t Have To Squint To Put the Spark Back In Your Romance”

      You misspelled ‘squirt’.

  14. Uh. I think she is using words she did not invent. From a culture she did not invent.

    1. I think she’s using words she cannot define from a culture she cannot comprehend.

  15. (it has never featured a gay couple, although other HGTV shows do so routinely)

    (Because their Cuban cells already feature world class literacy and healthcare.)

  16. I’m against HGTV because my wife sees the cute 100 lb woman take on huge remodeling jobs and finish them up in a half hour (or maybe an hour tops) and thinks, “hey I can do that too”.

    The entire concept of the cameras being turned off for days while burly tradesmen work on the job is beyond my wife’s ken. She thinks it is all LIVE!

    She can never figure out why her jobs never go as well.

    1. Haha. Story of my life.

      Try explaining why you need certain tools to do the job right, when that show only seems to use a miter saw, cordless drill and tape measure to do all their projects.

    2. I hate it because it’s the only thing on the TV in the waiting room at my dentist office. As I’m sitting there nervously trying to take my mind off of the various excavations my dentist will be performing (yeah, I’m a total pussy in the dentist chair), some jerkoff on the TV fires up a great big drill. Fuck!

      1. As I’m sitting there nervously trying to take my mind off of the various excavations my dentist will be performing (yeah, I’m a total pussy in the dentist chair), some jerkoff on the TV fires up a great big drill.

        I think your dentist might be the greatest troll the world has ever seen.

      2. One word for you: Nitrous Oxide!

        1. LOL I was put under that stuff once (for a super-sensitive molar that no amount of Novocaine could quiet). I didn’t like it much. It took care of the pain (in the sense that I just didn’t care) but I didn’t like the weird paralyzed feeling it gave me. At one point I thought of signaling to the dentist to give me a short break, but my arm wouldn’t move no matter how hard I thought “move, dammit!”.

    3. I like the Property Brothers show, but the part where Drew tells the couple “Congrats, you’ve bought a house!” always annoys the hell out of me. Anyone who’s bought a house and is familiar with the contract process knows it’s not that simple. That, and the stupid people who pick the house that’s right at the top of their budget instead of the one that would leave them an extra $15K for unforeseen repairs drives me nuts.

      1. This guy gets it.

      2. I assume the house it already picked out anyway, and the Brothers go through a list of people and their shitty houses to pick which ones they can actually do something with for the show. The whole process of looking through the houses and walking up a million of them and walking back out is just staged.

        1. This is 100% correct. Most of the time on House Hunters they’ve already purchased the “winning” house before they look at them. Sometimes it is even their furniture in there. A fun game is to watch that show and try to use body language and observation of what gets said to determine the one they already own.

          Also, on Fixer Upper you have to at least be under contract before you even start the process.

          1. I’ve spent twenty years financing real estate and its construction on one level or another. I would NEVER start dropping money into improvements or start construction on a property I did not already own. So many potential problems can come up.

            I think the worst thing I ever saw was some clients of mine who ran adult family homes wanted to get early posssesion and start work on a property they had under contract. The seller said no way. So they illegally entered the property using a hidden key of which they were aware. They moved into the basement and started work. The listing realtor caught them about a week later. He kicked them out and the seller cancelled the deal. My asshole clients told them I said it was ok. Needless to say, they became ex clients at that point.

  17. First they came for the lingerie models…
    [good choice bro]

    1. If they take them, I don’t wanna be here.

  18. Once you recognize that leftest are the racist and that they view the world through that lens their articles make sense. They live in a world of stereotypes of races and cultures, and everyone better stay in their Goddamn box or they’re going to hear about it. That and they’re retarded.

    1. Reaching across cultures and races is racist, but staying in your own box and telling others to do the same is diversity. Got it.

    2. When a leftist disagrees with you, call them pedophiles.

      1. I like it. I am appropriating this, providing you’re the right culture…

    3. Calling the Progressive Left ‘retarded’ is an insult to every developmentally retarded person who ever loved. The Progressive Left isn’t retarded, they are willfully ignorant and proud of it.

  19. When even the Buzzfeed comments section thinks you’re being a progressive asshole, there’s a pretty good sign you’re the biggest douchebag on the entire planet.

  20. Being opposed to gay marriage is now ‘anti-gay’? I guess all of the world’s religions, with the exception of a few, would be ‘hate groups’.

    I miss the good old days when the lie was ‘gay marriage will not interfere with your religion, at all’. The more gay marriage has morphed into ‘thought policing’ the more I find myself now opposing it.

    1. Because it was never really about “gay marriage”. Gay people who want to get married is a tiny part of the World population.

      Power is what it is all about- who has it and who wants it. Unfortunately for lefties, an old piece of paper holds great power in the USA and they don’t like that. The lefties cannot destroy the Constitution but they cannot ideologically follow it either.

      1. “The lefties cannot destroy the Constitution”

        They’ve done a damn good job so far (with not a little help from the righties).

        1. Which is why we need the restoration of the HUAC. Progressives must be destroyed for their seditious practices.

    2. Oh boy. I hope John doesn’t read this. He’ll go off on how he predicted all of this.

      And just to clarify, I agreed with him at the time. But he takes this subject matter very seriously.

      1. He wasn’t the only one who predicted this Orwellian GoodRightThinknik Politburo stuff, EDG. A great many of us did so and proven correct.

        “Let and let live,” is a ratchet that only goes one direction, according to Robby Horses.

        And please give our regards to the lovely and gracious Mrs. reppin’ LBC.-)

    3. JS-
      The same good old days that contained the sentence, “If you like your insurance plan, you can keep it”?

    4. Being opposed to gay marriage is now ‘anti-gay’? I guess all of the world’s religions, with the exception of a few, would be ‘hate groups’.

      And yet, if you’re high up in the leftist (and Professional Fake Libertarian) pantheon of victimhood, like an Islamonazi for example, you can murder dozens of gays in cold blood simply for being gay and they’ll either completely look the other way or rationalize it by saying Christians are really to blame somehow.

      1. “Being opposed to gay marriage is now ‘anti-gay’? I guess all of the world’s religions, with the exception of a few, would be ‘hate groups’.”

        Exactly.

    5. Well, if you’re against gay people having legal unions simply due to their sexual orientation–which, to be fair, has been the norm for most of human civilization since the dawn of ancient Sumeria–it’s probably safe to say that you’re anti-gay in the same way that people who oppose inter-racial relationships could be considered racist (and yes, this applies to non-whites who think blacks, Asians, etc. should “stick with their own”).

      That said, gay people who think polygamy should be illegal are hypocrites themselves, so it’s not like this sort of bigotry is unique to the fundie Christian set.

    6. I guess all of the world’s religions, with the exception of a few, would be ‘hate groups’.

      All of the world’s religions except the ones that are practiced by various “brown people” and other “oppressed people of color.”

    7. Except for Muslims.

  21. Soave – Please define “anti-gay” church.

    1. An evangelical church in Orange County will, with a 99% certainty, be opposed to gay marriage.

      1. That’s not the same thing as “anti-gay.”

        1. According to Robby Horses, the congruence in terms, to be sure, cannot be denied.

        2. Everybody is always somworked up about the fags……..

    2. All churches and synagogues are anti-gay. All white people are racist. And Islam is the religion of peace.

  22. Would this be a good time to point out that Fixer Upper is based in Waco, Texas? How many suitably diverse couples/groups/what have yous does anyone think are available? The show would have to bus some in and I doubt they’ve got the budget for it.

  23. Question. By “anti-gay” do you mean Westboro Baptist Church “God hates fags” anti-gay? Or do you mean, “Homosexuality is one of many sins in the sight of God” anti-gay?

    1. I had a similar question. There’s a big difference between “I personally disapprove of the gay lifestyle choice (due to my religion or for other reasons), but they are still people and therefore I respect them” (YMMV as to the truth claims contained in that statement, but that’s not the point) and “If you’re gay, you’re a special kind of evil and I hate everything about you and your lifestyle.”

      That we now seem to be lumping the former in with the latter is infuriating to me.

    2. TEE-
      A distinction without a difference to the perpetually enraged.

  24. According to the BuzzFeed article, the Fixer Upper couple is not even a member of an “anti-gay” church–at least not in the sense of being “hateful” to gay people. They are simply (as the article headline says quite clearly, to its credit) members of a church that does not recognize same-sex marriage.
    .
    You know. Like Nancy Pelosi.

    1. They are moderately famous people in a lifestyle show on a network with a lot of LBGT viewers. Either they have a perfectly mainstream relationship with homosexualtiy (either okay with it or “love the sinner hate the sin”) or they have never actually interacted with an openly gay couple (possibly true; it is Waco, TX afterall). If they had ever outright refused to work for a gay couple because they were gay we’d know about it already. If a gay couple had been refused by them thusly Buzzfeed, Jezebel, or Cosmo or some other outlet would have already run with it.

      1. Don’t be shocked if a bunch of diesel dyke couples start applying to be on the show and cry “homophobia!!” when they aren’t chosen, which is pretty typical of how these “activists” operate.

        1. Excellent idea! Although I suspect the only “diesel” being handled by Waco dykes would be the stuff they tip the full-service Mexicans to put in their full-grain-seat 3500HD Sierra Denali.

    2. Nancy Pelosi has already made it clear that she disagrees with her church. If the Gaineses want to avoid being burned as anti-gay witches, they’d damn well better do the same.

    3. They are simply (as the article headline says quite clearly, to its credit) members of a church that does not recognize same-sex marriage.

      Which you could say the same thing about anyone who’s a member of just about any church other than the Unitarians and perhaps a small handful of other denominations.

      1. And even that only in the past few years. (Except the Unitarians; it’s pretty easy to permit same-sex marriage when you have long dispensed with any teaching except “If there is a God, he is not threefold.”)
        .
        I was going to say something to this effect, but I liked closing on the Pelosi bit.

        1. The Unitarians aren’t really a church at this point, they’re more of a left-wing social club akin to the Shriners that feature some superficial spiritualist elements and without the funny go-karts at parades.

          1. Ah, you know I never really thought about it this way in so many words but you are right. Kind of like being in the Ethical Humanist Society, except with the social advantage of more secure First Amendment protection and slightly fewer eye rolls.

  25. The brand and its creative leads shamelessly cherry-picked imagery, breaking apart aesthetic references from wherever they wanted and stitching them back together again.

    Uhm… Isn’t this pretty much a good summation of how culture evolves and develops in the first place? Jesus titty-fucking Christ these people are fucking stupid.

  26. Call me crazy but I think all this hysteria needs to be dealt with behind the scenes; Mafia style.

    You know, someone sends Vinny and Vito to their house and tell them ‘youz makin’ all kinds of troubles for dis guy ‘ere? Stop it or else…’ And they show some pictures. Or worse.

    Behind the scene rough justice.

    Because they ain’t gonna stop on their own until a lot of innocent people are hurt.

  27. I wonder what kind of views you would find at Keith Ellison’s mosque.

    1. Presumably not very good ones. It is in Minnesota, after all.

  28. The article did not say whether the Gaines are anti-gay themselves, or whether Fixer Upper actually discriminates against gays (it has never featured a gay couple, although other HGTV shows do so routinely), because its author simply doesn’t know. The views of the Gaines’ pastor are, remarkably, the only evidence.

    Why do people keep assuming Klan members are racist? I mean sure the KKK’s leadership has said racist things, but do we really know if the individuals members are racist? I’m sure if we asked them they’d say they weren’t. /sarc

    1. Did Obama believe all the stuff Rev. Wright said?

      1. He deserves to be held accountable for it (that said, I was never as outraged by what Rev. Wright said as I was apparently supposed to be).

        1. The Gaines are not running for President. People want to know a bit about the ethical philosophies of the man who will occupy the most powerful office in human history. Why on earth would we expect the hosts of some silly home-decorating show to pronounce to the general public upon which of their congregation’s pastor’s statements they do or do not consider to be consonant with their own idea of Christian doctrine? While enjoying watching him install drywall did you care about whether or not Bob Vila personally approved of your private sexual practices? This is insanity.

    2. That’s right. Being a member of a church which takes the position on homosexuality that pretty much every Christian denomination did until a generation ago is *exactly* like being a member of the KKK, and everyone who belongs to such a church needs to be shunned the way Klansmen (Klanspersons? Wouldn’t want to lets those Klan chicks off the hook by using non-inclusive language) are.

      In fact, Nancy Pelosi needs to be thrown out of office and never allowed to show her face in polite company again, since she has steadfastly refused to leave her church. She’s exactly like a Klansman (sorry, Klanswoman) who says she’s staying in the Klan in hopes that it will change its positions.

      1. My point is that if you’re publicly a member of an organization that actively advocates for a particular set of views, the assumption that you’re in favor of those views is not ridiculous, as Soave seems to think it is. We don’t have to ask each NRA member individually if they’re in favor of gun rights. We don’t have to ask each PETA member individually if they dislike fur coats. etc.

        1. We don’t have to ask if long time members of Rev Wright’s congregation hate America.

        2. BS people go to church for many reasons mostly for spiritual guidence. The problem is you can’t always find a church that you can 100% agree upon. do you agree with your wife 100% of the time if you don’t you better denounce her and everything else she may stand for. its a BS attempt show their liberal creeds by trashing people they feel are to popular and have moral believes different than theirs.

          1. I like Rev Wright’s church. The kids like their Sunday school teacher, and the Bible study group makes me feel welcome. I’m a little uncomfortable when he preaches God Damn America, but hey we’ll never find 100% of what we want.

  29. progressive women’s magazine

    I don’t…what?

    1. KK,

      You’re not a real woman in their eyes.

      1. But she is in ours 🙂

  30. What do you mean “we”, white man.

  31. (it has never featured a gay couple, although other HGTV shows do so routinely)

    Has anyone ever looked into or run the numbers on this aspect of things? It seems like if I see three couples on HGTV, one is either openly gay or ambiguously unisex. I don’t have any problem with that socially or policy-wise other than it’s inconsistentency with real life. HGTV catering to homosexuals disproportionately to their representation or concurrence in society isn’t really a problem except, as now appears to be the case, the 5% of the population being catered to becomes convinced by their echo chamber that another portion of the population doesn’t exist, but shouldn’t.

    As Robby and others have pointed out, the Gaines Family has never expressed anything one way or the other and, as per their show, very much convey a ‘love thy neighbor’ and/or ‘hate the sin’ attitude. I’m sure HGTV, Cosmo, and Buzzfeed have had to tell flaming homosexuals, in no uncertain terms, too fuck off because they were too flaming, homosexual, and/or hurtful.

    1. Actually, if anyone on HGTV has been negging flaming homosexual potential guests for being flaming homosexuals, it almost certainly has not been the fucking Gaines. Gay folks love to tell other gay folks the precisely correct and acceptable way to be gay, and have little shame in being bigoted against you if you are not. This is a problem with all minority groups to some extent (and I should know)–it’s a part of the “sociology of oppression,” so to speak–but gays really seem to take it to another level.

    2. Just to amplify the point that you would definitely think about 25% of the population is gay based on the characters on TV.

      1. Meh. On a per show basis, on certain networks or at certain prime times, maybe. I think per character, as long as you select a decent representative sample, you’d be closer to 10ish%. I think HGTV is probably above average as taste/fashion/trendiness is part of the schtick. I think it was worse in the 90s and 00s.

        I do agree that there’s still lots of pointless homosexuality in the general story telling or a general confusion or obvious retardedness that complex sexual relationships don’t intrinsically make a character complex.

        1. Fair enough. Having a gay character in sitcom is really no different than any of the other cookie cutter characters that populate most TV. Most of it isn’t complex or original. So the writers go open the cabinet and ..hmmmm….let’s have an asian woman, a black friend, and ..oh yeah…a gay couple.

      2. The world according to TV: The population is 50% LGBTQIA, all criminals are white, judges and doctors are black, men are stupid, and children all have learning disabilities.

        1. ..and no one has more profound insight than overweight black women and pre-pubescent girls.

    3. as per their show, very much convey a ‘love thy neighbor’ and/or ‘hate the sin’ attitude.

      If a politician was giving a stump speech about how they love libertarians, they just hate libertarianism, would you consider that a laudable thing, or would you think it was just doublespeak?

      1. You’re really *really* bad a this whole disingenuous line of questioning thing.

        1. Stormy has been for a *very* long time. Its been toting that +2 Axe of Perpetual Dullness and using everything as a grindstone for years as part of its membership in The Church of the Perpetually Aggrieved .

          If there is one commenter here who can out-Robby Horse Robby, it’s Stormy.

          1. Robby at least can muster some subtlety or style and at least seems to accept at a fundamental level that people don’t fight without a reason, even if their reason is the opposite of yours. This is like Stormy’s holding the dull axe to his throat and screaming “I’ll do it!” to threaten or ply his opponent into drinking poison.

            It’s sub-amsoc level retardedness. It usually takes him at least two sentences if not two whole posts to fuck himself into a similar oxymoronic mess.

      2. Uh… don’t most politicians hate libertarianism?

        I mean, I wouldn’t vote for them, but I wouldn’t regard them as some sort of Enemy to destroy either, particularly when there are so many people out there who openly despise both libertarians and libertarianism. At least we’re halfway to getting them to come around.

        1. Do. Not. Engage.

          As was said, he’s standing on a hill with a sharp object at his throat offering you a cup of poison and asking, “Why aren’t you ready to die yet? Drink or I’ll kill myself!” Best just to keep on walking as though he weren’t even there.

      3. Does the hypothetical politician want to ban libertarianism? If not, if their position is ‘I disagree or even loathe this thing, but respect the right of people to do it/believe it,” then his position on libertarianism would be, well, pretty libertarian.

  32. The fact is that even as the world gets more connected, a sexist, patriarchal, mostly white corporation continues to take what it wants for its own gain. Its exploitation of these cultural references is meant to lead directly to profits. And I’m not buying it.

    Tell me more.

    1. Indeed, it’s hard to tell whether the wrong committed by the persons in question is being white or turning a profit. It is clearly one or the other, by that closing sentence, but nothing leading up to it does anything to explain which or why; it just describes the costumes over and over, asserts over and over that they are wrong, and intersperses lots of pictures of perky-breasted young ladies of various colors. So yeah, all in all I got no complaints.

  33. Can we stop calling Christians anti-gay? We aren’t. We say it is a sin like any other.

    1. Mormons catch so much shit for their “hatred” of people who enjoy rubbing genitals with those with matching junk, but none at all for their hatred of those who enjoy drinking coffee and tea! Well, I got news for those arabicaphobic bigots: We are wired, we are inspired, get used to it!

      1. but none at all for their hatred of those who enjoy drinking coffee and tea

        If they were spending millions of dollars trying to outlaw coffee and tea, I’m sure they would.

        1. I highly doubt they would be accused of “hatred.” Drug prohibitionists are called many things by their opponents, but rarely that.
          .
          More importantly, in what universe did the Mormon Church spend millions of dollars trying to outlaw homosexuality?

          1. I didn’t say the Mormon Church, I said Mormons. There’s been plenty of coverage regarding how Mormons are a major source of funding for anti-gay and anti-same-sex marriage organizations.

            1. Funding efforts to outlaw homosexuality?

              1. Yes, the World Congress of Families, for example, is largely Mormon and has been involved with the anti-gay laws recently passed in Uganda and Russia.

            2. Feminists have spent millions of dollars to outlaw porn (Gloria Allred being a case in point). Can we describe feminism therefore as being essentially anti-masturbation?

    2. Caveat: I think many if not most Christians deep fown don’t really believe their own religion and just live in a state of cognitive dissonance due to social pressure.

      That said, if you are truly Christian, then yes, you are anti-gay. The Bible is very clear what it considers the appropriate punishment for homosexuality.

      1. Stormy Dragon: “The Bible is very clear what it considers the appropriate punishment for homosexuality.”

        Do tell?

        “While all of these sexual sins?adultery, sodomy, and bestiality?remain abominable sins, with the coming of Christ and the abolition of the Old Covenant administration, they can no longer be said to be capital crimes. As revolting as any of them they may be, the reasons they were earlier given the death penalty was not merely sexual perversion, but for violating sacred boundaries that at the time were placed under the jurisdiction of the civil government. With these boundaries now removed, the civil government no longer has authority to impose death.

        “In light of this, I have revised my earlier published views that adultery and homosexual sodomy are punishable by the death penalty.”

        http://americanvision.org/1383…..penalties/

        Semper reformanda.

      2. That said, if you are truly Christian, then yes, you are anti-gay. The Bible is very clear what it considers the appropriate punishment for homosexuality.

        I assume you also think all “Real” muslims must therefore behead infidels?

        1. Stormy is using an inversion of the ‘no true Scotsman fallacy’ it seems. “True” X believe Y, and therefore are evil, justifying a war (military, cultural, ideological, whatever) on X. Anf if you call yourself an X but don’t believe Y, you’re not really X.

          Pamela Geller types will use it to justify declaring war on the entirety of the Islamic world, feminists will use it to claim that anyone who doesn’t identify as a feminist is by definition a sexist. So on and so on. I say, as a non-Muslim, that I don’t care what ‘true Islam’ is, indeed there is no such thing to me. Likewise, I can like anti-feminists and I can also like Christina Hoff Summers regardless of her calling herself a feminist, because the labels mean nothing to me, especially regarding ideologies/religions to which I don’t subscribe.

          Perhaps it should be called the ‘essentialism fallacy.’

    3. Can we stop calling Christians anti-gay? We aren’t. We say it is a sin like any other

      I think the problem with “anti-gay” isn’t just the finger pointing at religions…

      ….but the idea that anyone/anything that doesn’t have the exact same super-affirmative POV as the media-orthodoxy is somehow “Anti” things.

      I am not religious myself, but i have a more favorable impression of some religions versus others = does this mean I’m ANTI – these other things?

      If I *were* religious – and i could selectively adopt catholicism because that’s how i was raised – would that by default make me therefore “Anti-Abortion” merely by virtue of my affiliation?

      (*critics will say if im not …. that i’m somehow “hypocritical”, because that’s what my ‘religion’ believes; which to me is a reductive and idiot depiction of how people engage with various aspects of culture; are “peaceful” muslims hypocrites for not massacring infidels, then?)

      Its assigning collective-guilt, or collective-opinions. Its utter horseshit.

      “Lack of affirmation”, or even “passive predjudice” is not equal to “Anti-something”. Its not even technically Bigotry. Simply holding beliefs is not the same as imposing them on society, and labeling people as “Anti” because they potentially have impolitic opinions (which they never express) is itself a ridiculous act of active prejudice.

  34. so it was okay for President Obama to attend an American hating church but white people better not go to a church where someone might not like gays

    1. also I read that mall of America now has a black Santa that is also cultural appropriation. I’m sure Santa doesn’t mind the help but Santa is of European origin

      1. That was Zwarte Piet filling in. Like the Vice President does when the President is unavailable.

      2. Santa is of European origin

        Was he? Some historians claim Saint Nicholas was Greek and some claim he was Moorishr.

        1. He was an Anatolian Greek, so no not technically European by birthplace. The Santa myth now popular around the world is pretty solidly European, though. The word itself is Dutch, of course, reaching the world by way of England by way of the United States.

          1. He was definitely born in Anatolia. The disagreement is whether we was himself Anatolian or was part of a Moorish family living in Anatolia.

            1. I have never heard this before, and don’t know even know what it means. “Moor” was just an imprecise term used back in the day, depending on context, to refer to everyone from blue-eyed Berbers and Turks to Arabs to sub-Saharan Africans to Indians and Sri Lankans, and even Filipinos and Slavs. It’s not used in modern scholarship except sometimes in very specific, contextually disambiguated instances (like talking about the invasion of Spain or Sicily). St. Nicholas died centuries before there was any such thing as a Muslim, let alone in Anatolia.

              1. “Moor” is the Anglicization of the Latin “Mauri”, that is the people from Mauretania. Who did exist long before Islam came into existence.

                1. Yes, that was the original use, from whence it expanded greatly due to general association with Islam. Are you saying there is controversy as to whether St. Nicholas was a Moroccan? If so that is news to me. If not I don’t see the relevance to what I said.

        2. Was he a Moor or just Moorish ?

          1. He could get a bit Moor-y from time to time.

        3. I guess technically since we are all decendents from Africa we are all black so I’ll correct myself and say a Black Santa is fine and since it is a mythical person anyone can play the part.

          1. I am sick and tired of the white man trying to claim Africa as his ultimate homeland. Must he appropriate everything?

            1. Yeah. Africans taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and those Greek homos ever got around to it

              1. homos??

                *TRIGGERED*

  35. Top Jezzie comment:

    Am I the only person in America who isn’t enamored with open floor plans? I am all about a house having good flow, but it seems weird to me to be able to see the entirety of your main floor no matter what. Does no one ever want to watch TV or read a book without hearing the dishwasher running or kids getting food?

    The house I grew up in had a seperate kitchen, dining room and living room and I loved it.

    Hmm, not about being open and inclusive after all!

    1. It’s a size thing. Separate rooms are better if your house is actually big enough to have separate rooms for each of those things. Open plan works better in smaller homes.

    2. I agree with this. Open floor plans typically mean cooking smells permeate the whole house.

      1. I mostly grew up in apartments, but when we lived in a house it was a very nice old, modestly-sized one. We ate in the dining room and hung out in the living room. I was as shocked when I first visited houses where these rooms were merely ceremonial as the hosts were that I did not find such an arrangement perfectly normal. I think this was some kind of conspicuous consumption thing, to aspire to be the sort of people who had unused ceremonial rooms like it was Buckingham Palace or some shit. I think these kinds of values, especially specifically the demand on kitchen size for eating space, led eventually to the open floor plan.
        .
        As with the more specifically McMansiony nonsense like two-story foyers, it took so long for the backlash to set in that I figured by this point it never would. But here it is! Soon even the gauchest yuppies will probably be turning their noses up at open kitchens. We might even end up with only poor people being stuck with them, like back centuries ago!

      2. Maybe you should cook something that smells good.

  36. “Anti-gay”?

    Used 4 times, but never defined.

    My church teaches that the Bible teaches that same-sex behavior is sinful. Therefore, we neither perform nor recognize “same-sex marriage.” But we also teach that homosexuals can — like any other sinner — freely receive forgiveness in Jesus Christ.

    Furthermore, we consider utterly contemptible the Westboro Baptist, “God hates fags” approach.

    The florist in Washington state considered the gay man who sued her for declining to arrange flowers for his “wedding” a dear friend.

    So which of us — my church, the Westboro Baptist crowd, and / or the WA florist — are “anti-gay”?

    I would hope that, if you decide to pursue the question of whether or not Chip and Joanna Gaines or their church are “anti-gay,” you explain what you mean by that in as detailed and truthful a manner as possible.

    1. if you decide to pursue the question of whether or not Chip and Joanna Gaines or their church are “anti-gay,” you explain what you mean by that in as detailed and truthful a manner as possible.

      Don’t hold your breath.

      Your comment is very much similar to my own above. I think the use of the term “Anti-Gay” here is as equally ridiculous as it was in Robby’s previous use

    2. Ya know how, if you refuse to date black people, you’re racist? Well, if you refuse to date gay guys (and sleep with them; come on, don’t be a prude) you’re anti-gay.

    3. According to Robby’s definition Nancy Pelosi, Tim Kaine, Andrew Cuomo, Joe Biden and Keith Ellison are all members of anti-gay churches as well.

      The haters.

  37. You mean white blue collar unionized Christians living in the rust belt don’t give a flip about diversity and gayness everywhere?

  38. The irony of a magazine called Cosmopolitan saying that shit… just wow.

  39. Is “racist” now the proggie version of “aloha”? Is there any complaint where they cannot include it in their statement? I suppose it is already an adjective and noun, so they have a head start.

  40. Does holding a conservative religious view of gay sexual behavior mean you are “anti-gay”?

  41. If I don’t agree with the gist of Soave’s articles does that make me anti-stupid?

  42. I am so sick of these pathetic, mewling little shit heads who call themselves “SJW’s”. I wish all of them would die a horrible fucking death, it would brighten my day and give me actual hope for the future.

  43. The more I see of this, the more convinced I become that “gays” are evil, hateful, wicked bullies with no redeeming features, and that taking the boot off their collective necks was a dreadful mistake. I could not possibly care much less than I do about what they do in bed, but their behavior out of it infuriates me.

    You may say: “But, m’lord, not all gays are like that!” Are they not, now? I remember the other “run the ‘homophobes’ out of business!” lynch hysterias that have been whipped up in the past few years. And while there may just have been gays who disapproved as strongly as I did, they were conspicuously silent and “silence is assent.”

  44. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ==================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  45. I Quit my office-job and now I am getting paid 99 USD hourly. How? I work over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was forced to try something different, 2 years after…I can say my life is changed-completely!

    Check it out what i do:===> http://www.NetNote70.com

  46. Cultural appropriation began because a bunch of native Americans didn’t like the competition they were getting from the eurocentric folks making turquoise and silver necklaces, earrings, decorative leather belts and hatbands (for “Cowboy” hats, no less) and began to push the idea of “genuine native American artwork. It’s all a bunch of racist shit. Are people of mixed blood unable to do “native art.” Is everything they do “appropriation.”

    Please help me understand. I’m just a poor, simple minded Okie, mixed blood mongrel.

  47. Work oppertunity: Start your work at home right now. Spend more time with your family and earn. Start bringing 85USD/???hr just on a laptop. Very easy way to make your life happy and earning continuously.last week my check was 24551USD pop over here this site

    =====================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  48. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ==========================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  49. I get paid ?85 every hour from online jobs. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my friend AT is earning ?10k /monthly by doing this job and she showed me how. Try it out on following website?O2

    ======================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  50. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here……. Clik This Link inYour Browser

    ===========================> http://www.homejobs7.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.