Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Red Tory misses the point

Red Tory asks:

Why is it that so many fundie whackaloons are so blatantly dishonest?

Red Tory seems to insinuate that in giving my examples of how culture has gone to the dogs, I am being dishonest. And he darn well only reads into a post what he wants to see.

He wrote:

Decrying the “crapification” of our “sexualized, vulgarized, de-christianized” culture, Suzanne, a small-minded Catholic termagant at Big Blue Rinse, cites a few examples of the brazenly indecent secular depravity she’s unaccountably forced to deal with on a regular basis while pathetically glued to the television all day:

Now, to be fair, he wrote in the comments of my second post:

By the way, the latest post was written without knowing about this post. For whatever difference that makes.

But he also writes:

I know exactly what you were saying.

Well, no.

The whole point of the section about what's on t.v. was to give examples. And maybe some of them were "off"-- I know Baywatch isn't on regularly although I think it might be on one of the French channels because that's what sparked it as an example, and it might not have been the Comedy Network (Channel, whatever) that had the comedian swearing every second word-- it might have been the CBC or some other network, but that's not the point. I didn't make up far-fetched examples of what one might see on t.v.

So why exactly are YOU watching women “skimping out with their breasts” I wonder Suzanne? Rather odd that.

The structure of my example was to show channel surfing...going aimlessly from channel to channel to find something to watch as people are wont to do. I don't go looking for offensive stuff, I just easily stumble on it when I channel surf.

No, the problem isn’t what’s on offer by television broadcasters, Suzanne; it’s your apparent unwillingness or inability to locate quality programming using your remote control.

I had written that there were exceptions.

The truly hilarious thing is that your wearisome diatribe was all in aid of the ridiculous contention that the FreeDominion website is “family friendly” – a fantastically absurd claim if ever I’ve heard one. Rather than desperately attempt to rationalize the legitimacy of its usage by some convoluted pretzel logic, why not just admit that the expression is wholly inappropriate and conveys a misleading impression of what that site is all about.

The whole point of the post was that the term "family-friendly", as it was used by Connie Wilkins, was not necessarily understood to mean what people on the left side of the spectrum might understand it to mean, and the point of the post was that we need another way of describing it.

You and FD’s founders might well think you have your own standards of “decency” (a curious perversion of the word under the circumstances),” but the fact of the matter is that “family friendly” was just a lame attempt to create some false linkage with the notion of “family values” thereby lending the site an unwarranted veneer of respectability in its upcoming battle with the government (presuming it materializes).

I can't read Connie Wilkins' mind, but I seriously doubt that her radio interview had anything to do with bolstering her case in fron the CHRC.

That you and the founders are acting in such a cynical and contemptible fashion to misrepresent what is little more than a haven for an angry right-wing fringe group comprised of extremists, bigots, loons, religious zealots, freelance nutjobs and other assorted miscreants and crackpots, all the while sanctimoniously claiming some sort of moral superiority in the process(...)

You mean like what you're doing now?

, is really quite astonishing.

What rubbish. You're not astonished, you're posturing. You're telling me that you're really astonished that I'm saying that our entertainment culture is morally decadent, and we, such decadent non-progressives at FD have the audacity to claim to rise above it?

That's astonishing to you?

That's not astonishing.

That's someone acting like he's morally pure taking a gratuitous swipe.

Not everyone Free Dominion is respectable. But you know what? That's the beauty of it. Free Dominion isn't a forum for ideologically pure, respectable "progressives" who can't be bothered with what people really think and feel, where all the chatter and must proceed within the bounds of political correctness with no offending remarks at all (unless they're directed at right-wingers) and forbidden political beliefs are censored.

No, we're not respectable in that way.

We're respectable in the fact that if you come on down and demonstrate the intent on having a conversation in good faith, show respect to others and generally respect the rules of the board, we will give you a hearing and talk to you.

Maybe it's because FD is so welcoming of the teeming masses that are so readily dismissed by the liberal establishment that it's so popular. There are no snobby, sanctimonious elites who, like the Pharisees of the New Testament, can't stand to be in same room with the wrong people. "Bigot" is the 21st century word for "sinner".

Visit Opinions Canada
a political blogs aggregator