tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post6198605008905509779..comments2024-03-18T05:10:55.676-07:00Comments on Dorothy Surrenders: On Faith & FandomDorothy Snarkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10143059192565751994noreply@blogger.comBlogger134125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-17548376059393337642013-08-26T04:53:13.833-07:002013-08-26T04:53:13.833-07:00Are you seeing someone at the moment DS? Are you seeing someone at the moment DS? spitfirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15148198945142285652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-29720716631845989752013-08-25T10:47:00.767-07:002013-08-25T10:47:00.767-07:00I see this as a very nice piece on the essence and...I see this as a very nice piece on the essence and reason for free speech.<br /><br />On a sidenote:<br />Do wish that Brad Paisley reference would have been a bit more clarified. I clicked the link and got sent to the writer's piece but was left with no sense at all of why the mention of Brad?<br />This left an impression Brad is an "accidental racist" or worse.<br />A bit ironic in light of the whole article, it seemed to me.<br />Not a Brad Paisley fan but I do happen to have seen an interview Brad gave about performing in the White House for a "black" president and he certainly seemed moved in the positive way about that opportunity.<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCvUy540I7oAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-53483638488433875422013-08-25T08:57:36.056-07:002013-08-25T08:57:36.056-07:00Much as I wanted the show to step up and have our ...Much as I wanted the show to step up and have our back (good grief but have we had theirs quite long enough) I think it's fair to consider that it would almost certainly be unlawful to deny employment based on religious beliefs. On a lay read of the law in Canada this certainly seems true of governmental bodies at a national level - with what appears to be piecemeal province-by-province law covering civil employment (not a lawyer, of course).<br /><br />I imagine that the show could neither challenge her beliefs, nor censure her for them, as I think that there is a reasonable argument that is unlawful and actionable.<br /><br />What I did want them to do is name no names but reach out - I had hoped the lesson was learned during the 301 debacle, that, when a minority group (even if some, not all) expresses concern and offence, the right thing to do is offer apology and a hand of friendship, not infer that you know better, and not dismiss out of hand - especially when I think it most reasonable to say that any other denigrated minority could expect a response.<br /><br />ValksyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-3054398383549737482013-08-23T14:33:44.682-07:002013-08-23T14:33:44.682-07:00Anonymous 12:39
"The absence of any real issu...Anonymous 12:39<br />"The absence of any real issue"<br />Wow. <br />The denigration of a whole group of people isn't a real issue.<br />RS supporting the man behind that vitriol isn't a real issue.<br /><br />I really don't think you could have shown your bigoted colors any more clearly if you had tried.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-91897297105829339332013-08-23T12:47:42.615-07:002013-08-23T12:47:42.615-07:00It is unfortunate that the initial reaction that R...It is unfortunate that the initial reaction that Rachel received was hostile. People were rude and mean, as often happens in social media. I wish that hadn't happened because it didn't allow the community to have a reasonable dialogue with Rachel, where she would have the chance to understand why promoting a man like Erwin McManus to her Lost Girl audience was inappropriate. <br /><br />Is it important that Rachel knows it's inappropriate to promote Erwin McManus to an LGBT audience? <br /><br />Had we just not responded, understanding that Rachel didn't even understand who it was she was promoting to the Lost Girl audience. Do you think Rachel would continue to talk about Mosaic, and promote Erwin McManus in future interview opportunities? <br /><br />Because McManus is so much nicer now; he's added some cream to that bitter cup of coffee he was serving up in 2006. I'm sure he voted against Prop 8 and encouraged the members of his congregation to vote against it also. <br /><br />It really is more important for us to be nice about this because people like Erwin McManus are no longer rallying against our right to equality. Anger is so unattractive, and unproductive. Be polite. You are not as important as they are. You have an opportunity to be kind and gracious. Love begets love. Erwin McManus loves us. He wants to save our shattered souls. Be thankful. You are setting a bad example. You don't have a right to your anger. You haven't suffered nearly as much as others. You're becoming just like them. Even though you are 'less than' them, it is important that you show them how polite you are. Don't forget to say please. Or, better yet:<br /><br />Don't Speak!<br /><br />sincerely, <br /><br />I'm not as important as You.InaiaYnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-14087686605168176462013-08-23T12:27:26.336-07:002013-08-23T12:27:26.336-07:00Cooperate and understand people who use deliberate...Cooperate and understand people who use deliberate language to illustrate LGBT people as sub-human? The subtextual message of describing us as "unnatural" and as filthy disgusting cannibalistic beasts is not exactly the Enigma Code. Dehumanising a group of people, stripping them of that fundamental aspect of self, is absolutely key to the denigrating and abuse of that group of people. It is a very old and very dangerous weapon to invoke against people.<br /><br />Must I really describe how that lesson has been used to harm people in the past? Really? And were those same people victimised by such foul behaviour also obliged to "cooperate and understand"? Or is that only something that you demand of LGBT people?<br /><br />McManus knew his audience would not turn from him, just as a pastor in North Carolina recently knew his audience wouldn't call him on his suggestion that we be placed in concentration camps. Their being willing to accept that we are less than human is not something that we should ever bloody cooperate with.<br /><br />ValksyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-26394369284159017322013-08-23T11:20:18.265-07:002013-08-23T11:20:18.265-07:00@12:39am
"The only facts which anyone has put...@12:39am<br />"The only facts which anyone has put out there is a 6 year old podcast, one yelp review and the story of a lesbian couple being told they couldn't attend a couples trip. That is it. There simply isn't any way for anyone to prove or disprove anything. "<br /><br />I guess you're right. We should wait until he drags a gay person around behind his pickup truck to really decide if he's a homophobe or not.<br /><br />There isn't a single shred of evidence contradicting all the facts you list above. Not one. <br /><br />McManus is a homophobe with a poisonous rhetoric. RS is delivering the very people most vulnerable to him, by accident or by design. Facts. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-32563194191589936392013-08-23T06:59:27.336-07:002013-08-23T06:59:27.336-07:00"There is nothing for any of us to use to pro..."There is nothing for any of us to use to prove anything..the reason no one from the show has responded beyond short and sweet emails is that there simply isn't an issue here that has existed outside the little bubble of a few hundred fans on social media."<br /><br />But the the thing is Anon 5:47, you and I really have no idea about so many things, including what percentage of LG fans, straight or gay, religious or not, were offended that Rachel gave a shout-out to McManus, unless there was a Gallup poll I missed. ; ) <br /><br />All we know for sure is a homophobic bigot has received quite a lot of free publicity, even if is notoriety! Perhaps that's exactly what he had in mind when he casually asked RS over breakfast one morning, "Hey Rach, only if you find the right moment of course, it would be cool if you could mention the film!" "Happy to!"<br />[Characters presented in last scene are entirely fictional and any resemblance to actual characters or events is purely intentional].Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-5082763495635976552013-08-23T05:47:54.724-07:002013-08-23T05:47:54.724-07:00Anon 12:39,
Most likely the reason no one from th...Anon 12:39,<br /><br />Most likely the reason no one from the show has responded is that none of them wish to touch this with a ten foot pole. Likely the lack of thoughtful response indicates others on LG share the same concerns regarding RS's relationship with EM and her flippant Twitter response to the LGBT viewers (and their upporters). As for EA's one tweet about RS, it held as much water as a leaky cup. EA's opinion, or rather her poor empty attempt at damage control, offered nothing. Basically EA said RS is a nice person, and did not address the issue at all. If public support were rendered by AS, ZP, KS, KHR perhaps this would hold a shred of authenticity...so far not one of them has said anything in support of RS regarding this specific issue. Also, the use of the words *drama bubble* is rather condescending. Similar to the use of #fucktard. The use of these terms indicate a complete and utter lack of respect and understanding of the valid concerns that touch the LGBT community. Minimizing LGBT individuals as EM has done must be called out, as should those who praise him. Hardly an issue that encompasses "a few hundred fans". Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-31954881626185354652013-08-23T05:37:36.630-07:002013-08-23T05:37:36.630-07:00Anon 3:51am
I have no idea what Omar Sharif reall...Anon 3:51am<br /><br />I have no idea what Omar Sharif really knew about the details of the RS controversy. I do know that in April 2013, he join GLAAD's staff as National Spokesperson and Strategic Giving Officer on GLAAD's Development team, "helping to build relationships with donors and raise vital funds to support GLAAD's work to lead the conversation for LGBT equality." I do know that in his tweeting supporting Rachel, he referenced @GLAAD. Why? I'm not inside his head but it sure seems to imply that as a National Spokesperson for GLAAD, he knows homophobia, and there's nothing here, folks, so move on.<br />Andrew Martin correctly called on him to clarify whether he wassaying GLAAD endorsed Rachel, and he was forced to acknowledge he was endorsing her as a friend not as a National Spokesperson for GLAAD.<br /><br />It does illustrate how using one's professional platform to make personal endorsements can confuse readers about what the endorser knows, what he/she is truly saying or implying, and what precisely he/she is actually endorsing.Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-89781137336305707052013-08-23T03:51:02.040-07:002013-08-23T03:51:02.040-07:00A question to all bringing up her friend from GLAA...A question to all bringing up her friend from GLAAD but specially for Mahlers5th because she brought those tweet. He commented on RS about the "noise" (for me it was a bad choice of words) and said thy are friends. But does he know what was really going on, about was the "noise" about? Did he listen to the sermon and that what people were asking was a confirmation that she doesn't support EM views on homossexuality that she shouldn't bring him in interviews like that one... I not saying she shares EM views above all i belive she doesn't fully understand what the "noise" is really about and that she is a bit naive in the pr department. But even if we make mistakes we should learn from them... So does her friend Omar knows what pople were talking about or he just came in her defense, his friend?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-22163284641212172052013-08-23T00:39:06.959-07:002013-08-23T00:39:06.959-07:00@brashsculptor
There is nothing for any of us to ...@brashsculptor<br /><br />There is nothing for any of us to use to prove anything..the reason no one from the show has responded beyond short and sweet emails is that there simply isn't an issue here that has existed outside the little bubble of a few hundred fans on social media.<br /><br />The only facts which anyone has put out there is a 6 year old podcast, one yelp review and the story of a lesbian couple being told they couldn't attend a couples trip. That is it. There simply isn't any way for anyone to prove or disprove anything. Not you, not me, not anyone. The absence of a story, the absence of a real issue, is the reason no one outside this little drama bubble has said a word- they haven't heard about it. It isn't news worthy. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-75014809035055886992013-08-22T19:42:49.040-07:002013-08-22T19:42:49.040-07:00For adults or teen viewers who had no idea who Ska...For adults or teen viewers who had no idea who Skarsten was, it was an easy Google search (or Twitter or Tumbler) to find out. However you discovered her, it was immediately evident that she was a vocal member and supporter of her church - Mosaic.<br />Some of you then Googled Mosaic and may have been impressed by their slick young hipster ads. Some of you may have looked deeper - some not. <br />No problem.<br />I will point out that when you saw the connection between Skarsten and Mosaic, you were then aware of her affiliation with McManus. And yes, that led some to put her in the "potentially a homophobe" group.<br />Then, when she gushed her support of McManus to a partially gay audience (he's an amazing person who is such an inspiration to her) she shifted a bit toward the "Possible homophobe" category.<br />When she refused to answer the call for clarity, refused to distance herself from McManus, and dismissed legitimate concern as "noise" I absolutely moved her to the "homophobe" category.<br /><br />I would like to point out that the issue that seems to have been missed is that after initially learning about her connection to Mosaic, we all collectively allowed this woman into our living rooms each week.<br />That WAS her first chance.<br />Then the dazzlingly stupid promotion of McManus came as chance two.<br />Now, after the dismissive and rude tweet (chance three), some demand that we AGAIN give her the "benefit of doubt" regarding her beliefs? <br />How many chances do we have to allow her before you accept that our grievance is legitimate and not the obsession of bored fan-girls?<br />How long will you continue to ignore facts?<br />Why do you defend her instead of asking for clarity?<br /><br />I call BS when I see BS. She associates with a homophobe, she gushes about how that homophobe is an inspiration, and she refuses to do or say anything that may damage her relationship with the homophobe or distance herself from continued inclusion in his church.<br />Homophobe.<br />Period.<br /><br />Disagree? <br />Fantastic! Please PROVE me wrong.<br />@brashsculptorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-87014614942889051682013-08-22T19:35:58.127-07:002013-08-22T19:35:58.127-07:00
The pastor Rachel Skarsten supports. http://www.y...<br />The pastor Rachel Skarsten supports. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMy_zAE3gDA<br /><br />bump.^bumpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-29477736203374568872013-08-22T18:09:22.611-07:002013-08-22T18:09:22.611-07:00The pastor Rachel Skarsten supports. http://www.yo...The pastor Rachel Skarsten supports. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMy_zAE3gDAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-26087317207581816122013-08-22T17:45:33.540-07:002013-08-22T17:45:33.540-07:00If fans suspected RS was a pedophile, would she ha...If fans suspected RS was a pedophile, would she have waited weeks to respond?<br /><br />Doubtful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-80465728320241721942013-08-22T16:00:11.773-07:002013-08-22T16:00:11.773-07:00In an effort to "reach across the aisle"...In an effort to "reach across the aisle" and meet in the middle, please be patient while I take a whack at this hornet's nest.<br /><br />I am saying the following ON THE RECORD here. This is my real opinion.<br /><br />"The actress is an idiot. Her beliefs are uninformed, hateful, and irresponsible. She has used her celebrity to endorse hate and draw attention to a cause that should be reviled."<br /><br />Wow. Strong words. Some of you are probably angry...maybe you think I am a jerk. Ok.<br />Maybe a little clarification would be useful right about now.<br />I am not talking about RS. <br />Here is what I am talking about;<br />http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=67050<br />I am talking about a Crazy SNL actress and her anti-muslim rants.<br /><br />See, just a little clarification from the OP is all it takes to put things in perspective.<br /><br />@BrashsculptorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-42802733315912336602013-08-22T12:59:37.453-07:002013-08-22T12:59:37.453-07:00@Mahlers5th,
Now your call for understanding and ...@Mahlers5th,<br /><br />Now your call for understanding and truly listening, from both sides, I can get behind and agree with. I am more understanding of Rachel's side in this, but nothing is to be gained from blow-off dismissals. <br /><br />And all praise for the Khaleesi of the Texas prairie.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-29146219709120935312013-08-22T12:57:37.387-07:002013-08-22T12:57:37.387-07:00Free speech has been bantered around here like a s...Free speech has been bantered around here like a sword but everyone it cuts both ways.<br /><br />We can all have our say; RS can endorse a hate minister and then tweet about her gay friends and support for the community against all that 'noise'.<br />This blog can come out and equate the questioning of RS by some fans as bullying and suggest we are using the same tactics as those in Russia who want to silence the LGBT community.<br />SOme of you can even suggest how the TV has an off button and if we don't like don't watch.<br /><br />I can also use this free speech to tell you all to wake up. What you're all discussing and trying to boil down to the bullying of an actress is simply the visible blemish of a bigger problem.<br /><br />Is is okay to publically portray one image but build it on a private foundation of hate? Is it okay to bash other people because they question something you don't see a point in?<br />Is it okay to let the little things go as long as you protest the big ones?<br /><br />I questioned RS because I wanted to understand where her opinion was, with her pastor or away from him. <br /><br />I question this blog because I think your comparison of language shows a bigger issue; the homophobes are starting to understand how to use Politically correct language to smudge the impact of what they are saying.<br /><br />I question how as an LGBT community anyone believes that we should not exercise our free speech to question and comment just as haters and homophobes do.<br /><br />I question why questioning is now seen as bullying? <br /><br />Because if questioning when I see grey areas means I'm a bully, I'd like the tshirt now please.<br /><br />@rainbowkathleenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-87348842147532385902013-08-22T12:35:47.262-07:002013-08-22T12:35:47.262-07:00Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.<br /><br />Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-19669127449259308822013-08-22T12:30:39.288-07:002013-08-22T12:30:39.288-07:00Addendum:
Let's play Guess Who Said It!
&quo...Addendum:<br /><br />Let's play Guess Who Said It!<br /><br />"The death penalty? Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion. Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state."Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-14224243246597417192013-08-22T12:13:46.078-07:002013-08-22T12:13:46.078-07:00And once more, for the record:
Rachel can attend ...And once more, for the record: <br />Rachel can attend any church she wants, she can hang out with homophobic bigots if she wants, she can tweet what an amazing person he is (no doubt for reasons other than his ancient, outdated homophobic beliefs that she doesn't share), she can turn around and sincerely love her friend from college (towards whom, I gather, she has never expressed a single homophobic syllable) and she is free to give a shout-out to said homophobic bigot to her many LG fans, not all of them LGBT, some of them (not the majority, I imagine) devout Christians themselves who have found a way to reconcile their identity with some of the mostly antiquated teachings (except to the pesky, noisy, and disturbingly powerful Religious Right). As Rachel has no doubt found a way to reconcile the teachings and practices of Mosaic with her basic love for the LGBT community. Being a devout Christian doesn't mean you espouse each and every tenet of your faith.<br /><br />See, I really do read, digest, and try to make sense of your posts because Dorothy is right about one thing: the battle for rights is not just about storming the barricades in noisy protests, or lobbying from the rafters at a state legislature hearing (was that a beautiful sight, or what?) -- it's about winning hearts and minds, one starfish at a time.<br /><br />So I hope you return the favor by not rolling your eyes and skipping past the noisemaker with the Hillary icon ("Not her again! Will someone please tell her to be more succinct?") and open your mind to the other opinions being represented here, without distorting them, trivializing them, reducting them ad absurdum, or making ad hominem attacks on the writers (not saying you have, although this post verges on reductio ad absurdum). <br /><br />Is there absolutely no validity to what people are trying to say? 1) Rachel showed a certain tone deafness in giving that shout-out in the first place, and 2) She could have shown a tad more sensitivity and voiced a little more sincere regret in her tweet <br />a week after the objections began swirling. Do you really categorically regret those two perspectives.<br /><br />If so, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, and go our separate ways -- but we are both entitled to our differing perspectives and at the very least should show basic human courtesy in listening to the other's perspective.<br /><br />["Will someone puleeze clue Mahler's5th into how santimonious she sounds? Booooorrrring"].Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-68618745692289364102013-08-22T11:36:25.424-07:002013-08-22T11:36:25.424-07:00Actually, here was a response to his shout-out
@...Actually, here was a response to his shout-out <br /><br />@Verecipillis: @OmarSharifJr @RachieSkarsten @glaad After S3 E1 of #LostGirl can a GLAAD spokesperson really comment on this? Does GLAAD now endorse Rach?<br /><br />To which Omar responded:<br />@OmarSharifJr: @Verecipillis @RachieSkarsten - I don't comment as a spokesperson. She's been my best friend since year 1 of college. 10 years knowing her!<br /><br />@Verecipilis countered:<br /><br />@Verecipillis: @OmarSharifJr It's great your standing by a long friend, sincerely. But if it was a personal remark why tag GLAAD? Extra credibility? Fishy.<br /><br /><br />@OmarSharifJr: @Verecipillis I keep them aware of everything I do in the lgbt space :) xx<br /><br /><br />Uh-huh.<br />Mahlers5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511704290540257618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-20101188095518127322013-08-22T11:17:06.205-07:002013-08-22T11:17:06.205-07:00If Omar Sharif hangs out with EM and starts saying...If Omar Sharif hangs out with EM and starts saying what an amazing man he is then yes!!! I also really hope Omar has had a chat with RS about the company she keeps!!!<br /><br />ps very easy to be on ur high horse when your name in anonymous isn't it!!!Em Chadwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509135783839488912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26871122.post-33539478357646224482013-08-22T10:33:30.429-07:002013-08-22T10:33:30.429-07:00Indeed, Omar Sharif Jr. has vouched for Rachel and...Indeed, Omar Sharif Jr. has vouched for Rachel and called her his BFF. (https://twitter.com/OmarSharifJr/status/367339436066877440) <br /><br />Not that having a gay best friend is an excuse. But, Omar Sharif Jr. also happens to be a national GLAAD spokesperson. I guess it really is all about the people you hang out with. Because Rachel hangs out with Edwin McManus. And Omar hangs out with Rachel. And GLAAD hangs out with Omar. So...GLAAD endorses Edwin McManus? Yeah, logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com