Friday, June 26, 2009

Those Damn Disney Princesses!

Yes, you can blame them, all eight of them, Snow White, Cinderella, Aurora, Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas, and Mulan. They are responsible, along with their male suitors, for teaching kids that heterosexuality is normal. Damn them to hell!

That is the findings of two noted "scientists" from the University of Michigan who spent several hundred thousand dollars (I'm sure we paid for it) researching the highest grossing G-rated films between 1990-2005. Let's be frank, they spent thousands watching children's films. How's that for a waste of Federal dollars?

There is even a whole new word!
Heteronormativity - representing heterosexuality as normal

Oh the horror! I guess we can overlook the 6,000 years of human history, of this generation, and the untold millions of examples of successful heterosexual relationships during this time in both reality and the arts. Instead we will focus on the less than 5% of the population who engages in alternative lifestyles and assume that they are in fact normal - they are the standard we should lift up in arts and entertainment.

"Despite the assumption that children's media are free of sexual content, our analyses suggest that these media depict a rich and pervasive heterosexual landscape," wrote researchers Emily Kazyak and Karin Martin, in a report published in the latest issue of the Sociologists for Women in Society (SWS) publication Gender & Society.

Honestly, I'm trying to picture Disney remaking Little Mermaid with Ariel and Ursula getting it on under the sea. Even as far left as Disney can be, I'm not seeing it. Plus, I don't see families flocking to the theater with their 5-year old girls to see it either.

The results, say the researchers, illustrate two ways that the children's films "construct heterosexuality": through "depictions of hetero-romantic love as exceptional, powerful, transformative, and magical," and "depictions of interactions between gendered bodies in which the sexiness of feminine characters is subjected to the gaze of masculine characters."

No, no, not that! Sexy female characters that attract the gaze of male characters. The nerve of some writers and directors. Don't they know how cool it would have been if Grandmother Willow complimented Pocahontas on her tight little (native American) body?

Pure love (agape) is very powerful because God is love. We reflect His love best in the husband/wife relationship. This mirrors his love for the Church. This love also comes with commitment, since there is no love without it. Romantic love (eros) is lust. Lust can lead to all sorts of problematic human interactions if it is not managed properly. These are all concepts that are challenging to a child. Why make it more difficult by introducing a cornucopia of alternatives to a 5 year old?

The SWS press release on the research blamed what they called the "old ideals" of romantic relationships, specifically those found the Brothers Grimm fairy tales, which in many instances inspired the films' storylines, for "such heavily gendered depictions and glorified portrayals of heterosexual relationships."

The team says the results point to heterosexuality achieving a "taken-for-granted status" "because hetero-romance is depicted as powerful."

"Both ordinary and exceptional constructions of heterosexuality work to normalize its status because it becomes difficult to imagine anything other than this form of social relationship or anyone outside of these bonds," they concluded.

"These films provide powerful portraits of a multifaceted and pervasive heterosexuality that likely facilitates the reproduction of heteronormativity."

The SWS press release concluded: "President Obama may have declared June to be Gay Pride Month, but entertainment for children therefore continues to perpetuate a less inclusive message, leaving those outside its confines with little to build their own dreams of happily ever after."

I'll ask my readers, some of which I know are parents. Should children be exposed to anything other than normal relationships at the ages that typically view Disney and G-rated films? Can't we just let them be kids and enjoy the story without pushing some hard-left, pro-gay message? I promise you if they attend public school or watch any movies or TV during their childhood they will receive all the alternative lifestyle indoctrination they can stomach. Do you really want to explain to a 5-year old why two dudes are making out on screen? They are facing enough challenges just with mom, dad, brother, sister and that crazy uncle that visits every Christmas.

For most of my lifetime feminists have attempted to emasculate boys, removing any fear of failure or desire to triumph. Competitive sports are reduced to where no score is kept and everyone gets a trophy. This creates a wimpy, unmotivated population destined for mediocrity.

Now, the radical gay agenda wants to teach our children that what they see in their parents and grandparents is not normal. Instead they need to seek out alternatives to be truly happy. And do we stop with homosexual couples? Why not polygamy? Its been practiced for centuries around the world. Bestiality can't be all bad either, can it? I hear NAMBLA is getting to be a pretty big outfit these days. We can't leave them out can we?

Definitely another sign of the approaching apocalypse.

Source article: Team of Researchers Blames Children's Films for Perpetuating "Heteronormativity"

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Beware The Naked French Fry Thief...

In Langley, British Columbia (Canada) there was a woman waiting in the drive-through for her food from a Wendy's restaurant. As the food was being handed to her, a naked man ran through the drive-through and stole her fries.

As we speak, Canadian police are searching for the butt-naked bandit throughout the area.Police search for naked french fry thief

As humorous as this story was, I felt there was a deeper life lesson to be learned. After at least 10 minutes of relatively minor thought it came to me. This is a metaphor for life under Obama's liberal vision for America. Work with me here...

Customer - Represents all free Americans who through their hard work earn the right to spend their money for food or anything else that they desire. This "pursuit of happiness" was guaranteed by our founding documents.

Wendy's - Represents the free market - manufacturers, doctors, lawyers and anyone else who offers products or services for sale or trade.

The Naked Man - Represents liberals who are always ready to steal and deprive hard-working Americans of the fruits of their labors. No matter how much the customer wanted or needed those fries, liberals will not let her have them because they know better. They add insult by doing this brazen act while naked - out there for all the world to see. They don't care. The fries belong to them and they will do what they want with them - customer and business be damned. Everyone loses when the naked man is running free.

The Police - Represent the press, or as they are called now, the state run media. There might be some half-hearted efforts to locate the naked man, but it will never be a high priority. They are enablers and really have no desire to catch the naked man. They may be in fact cheering for him. In times past, reporters were watchdogs for freedom. Those days are gone. Now they are largely lapdogs and sycophants for the naked man.

What is the lesson to learn from all this? We must lock up the naked man before he causes any more damage. It starts with fries today, but tomorrow its your car, your job, your health care and all freedom. Eventually, the naked man will take away everything. He must be stopped before its too late.

Friday, June 19, 2009

Pray For Persia...

At this very moment in Iran, thousands of people are standing up for freedom. The Mullahs and their puppet president, Im a mad nut job, are cowering in fear at the looming overthrow of this very evil government that has terrorized this great country for 30 years. They have even imported foreign thugs from Syria and their terrorist puppets to attack their own people.

As a personal aside, I had a neighbor that grew up in Iran. He called it Persia and would never refer to it as Iran. His family left in 1979 after the islamic revolution brought an end to peace, prosperity and freedom that they had enjoyed previously. Not that everything was perfect, but there was religious tolerance and freedom that vanished under the islamic tyranny.

He often hoped that the people in Iran would once again enjoy freedom that he remembered from his childhood.Today, the people, fed up with the oppression, have taken to the streets. Hundreds have been killed or wounded.

If there was a time for the leader of the free world to stand up and support freedom, it is NOW. But Obama is nowhere to be found. In fact, in his statement on the issue, he said the following:

"When you've got 100,000 people who are out on the streets peacefully protesting, and they're having to be scattered through violence and gunshots, what that tells me is the Iranian people are not convinced of the legitimacy of the election. And my hope is that the regime responds not with violence, but with recognition that the universal principles of peaceful expression and democracy are ones that should be affirmed."

Wow! Way to stand up for freedom. Must not be to rough on those blood-thirsty dictators that have raped and murdered their own people, funded terrorism throughout the Middle East and threatened Israel with a nuclear destruction. Don't want to make the mullahs mad, I guess.

Let's contrast that to other great Presidential speeches confronting evil. Like another Democrat, although probably a Conservative by today's standards, at John F. Kennedy's inauguration he said this:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

THAT is what America is all about. Confronting evil and promoting freedom throughout the world - for with freedom, comes peace.

From George Bush's axis of evil speech - one threat was removed, but two others remain, undeterred by our current leadership:

"America will lead by defending liberty and justice because they are right and true and unchanging for all people everywhere. No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture -- but America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity: the rule of law ... limits on the power of the state ... respect for women ... private property ... free speech ... equal justice ... and religious tolerance.

America will take the side of brave men and women who advocate these values around the world -- including the Islamic world -- because we have a greater objective than eliminating threats and containing resentment. We seek a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror."

Words can change history. Words can inspire and build faith. Words can also prevent people from enjoying the God-given freedom that we've enjoyed for most of our history.Let's look at how words can change history.

For many of you, Ronald Reagan may be just a name in a history book. But there was no greater President during my lifetime. He is largely responsible for bringing an end to communism controlling most of Europe. And he accomplished this without a shot, simply a vision and a purpose that ALL men should be free.

"Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty -- the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace.

There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.

Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev -- Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

You can see the speech and the read the text here. It is as powerful now as it was 23 years ago.

That was leadership. That was statesmanship. That is how you confront evil. That is what American leaders SHOULD proclaim to the oppressed people of the world!

Pray for Freedom and Peace In Persia (Iran).

Monday, June 15, 2009

Cap & Trade...

The Tax Foundation has come up with a nifty tool to estimate how much you will have to pay Al Gore to fight his global warming scam. You can calculate your own"contribution" right here. The sad thing is that all this money will be taken out of the economy and do NOTHING to change the climate.

Liberals are pushing hard for a government takeover of health care right now which is rather frightening. Health care is already screwed up precisely because government has its tentacles all over the industry. I saw this firsthand during my Father's final weeks.

But as scary as government run health care might be, the added taxes and regulation that would have to be created to fight "global warming" would be catastrophic. Every sector of the economy would be attacked. Every human activity would have to be monitored, regulated and taxed. There would be absolutely no freedom and no privacy in an Obama/Al Gore run war against the sun.

My annual donation to the Al Gore Enrichment Fund came to just under $1,000. By my estimates the annual government theft would come to over $250 billion stripped from the economy. Now if Obama and Al Gore could only figure out who to pay to make the sun not shine so much...

Saturday, June 13, 2009

I Remember When Letterman Was Kind Of Funny...

Taking potshots at celebrities and government officials is what late night comedians do best. Politicians, especially Conservative ones, must grow thick skin in order not to get offended by the attacks and insults.

Last week, David Letterman crossed the line when he started talking about Sarah Palin. Sarah is a big girl and not easily rattled, so when Letterman put out a top ten list that accused her among other things of updating her "slutty flight attendant look" and making a coat out of rat pelts, it was in poor taste, but not too scandalous. But then he went on to imply that Alex Rodriguez knocked up Palin's 14-year old daughter during their trip to a Yankees game. If that wasn't bad enough, he followed up with a "joke" that accused john, Eliot Spitzer, was being serviced by Willow.

After the backlash, Letterman tried to make light of it and explain it as he meant to direct the joke towards Palin's older daughter - as if that made it less disgusting. It was this non-apology that put me over the edge. Rape of a child is never funny. But the fact that CBS has not said one peep or punished Letterman in any public way disturbed me greatly. The network has a responsibility to keep its talent in check when they go too far.

For the first time in my life I wrote a letter to a network demanding action. I followed this up with letters to advertisers and my local affiliate. I will not watch any CBS programming until very public action is taken to punish or remove Letterman from the network. I know this sounds extreme, but this Conservative bashing has gone way too far in this case. If Imus gets fired for his Rutgers girl's basketball team remark, Letterman must go. After all, Letterman is not live TV. They wrote the jokes, rehearsed them and still had an opportunity to edit the material before broadcast, but they chose not to do this.

Letterman's very long 15 minutes is finally over!