Men Are Nothing But Sperm Donors

[melon]

You use the name Jesus Christ to make a point and yet you dont believe in his story..... weird.
Totally off topic, sorry. I just found it ironic

Did I *ever* say I didn't believe? Tell me.

Liberal Protestantism is credited with not only saying that the Bible is not literal, but also doesn't believe in hell.

Frankly, this assumption is plain uncalled for.

Melon

 

[Irvine511]

well, i'm straddling both worlds ...

i work for a television channel where the GM is a female who came from the BBC.

though i'm not working for the channel itself, right now; doing an educational project instead, but for the same company.

 

[financeguy]

Anyway if the 'Christian Taliban' are so all pervasive, then how the heck does South Park get produced?

 

[melon]

Anyway if the 'Christian Taliban' are so all pervasive, then how the heck does South Park get produced?

It's on cable, not network television. It's also on after 10 pm, which makes it even less regulated.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Shit

Another f up FYM thread

Why talk about anything when we can toss "Christian Taliban" in a thread and go off on conservative Christians....

 

[melon]

Why talk about anything when we can toss "Christian Taliban" in a thread and go off on conservative Christians....

Because, like it or not, they are a major force behind American television. You get a breast on for a fraction of a second and you get record FCC fines. I watched CBC the other day, on the other hand, and not only saw breasts but an ass during prime time. God forbid!

And when it comes to depictions of gay people on TV, these are the same people who bitch to the FCC complaining they are "indecent." Most thankfully, the FCC has ignored them on the latter.

As someone who works in this industry and is interested in artistry and creativity, I will complain about any group that works to stifle creativity. Thank goodness premium cable is fully unregulated, but I also happen to live in a rural area and can't get cable.

Melon

 

[financeguy]

Shit

Another f up FYM thread

Why talk about anything when we can toss "Christian Taliban" in a thread and go off on conservative Christians....

I don't often agree with you but I do on this.

 

[melon]

Anyway, I'm tired of this thread myself.

Summary, for those looking for hidden agendas:

1) It is NOT the fault of women that has made BBC to be perceived as "crappy." U.S. reality television, in fact, is mostly derivatives from European and often *British* television, and people here eat them up. Likewise, the CBC is also accused of being "crappy" in Canada, and they are NOT female dominated. In other words, the writer of the article here has dug up "sexism," because he's stagnating in his career probably.

2) If you want more *accountability,* then push for more open ratings and focus groups on your television. Non-commercial and government-owned television, generally speaking, does not have to a flying fuck about what people think, because they don't have to worry about ratings. Now PBS cares, to a degree, because they have to worry about pledge drives, but BBC? When it's tax supported and non-commercial, what incentive is there to actively search for shows that everyone wants to watch?

And that's it. I'm tired of this.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Because, like it or not, they are a major force behind American television. You get a breast on for a fraction of a second and you get record FCC fines. I watched CBC the other day, on the other hand, and not only saw breasts but an ass during prime time. God forbid!

And when it comes to depictions of gay people on TV, these are the same people who bitch to the FCC complaining they are "indecent." Most thankfully, the FCC has ignored them on the latter.

As someone who works in this industry and is interested in artistry and creativity, I will complain about any group that works to stifle creativity. Thank goodness premium cable is fully unregulated, but I also happen to live in a rural area and can't get cable.

Melon

The only place your made-up organization has any influence is in your mind.

Or, does any one filing a complaint with the FCC grant them instant membership in the "Christian Taliban"?

 

[melon]

The only place your made-up organization has any influence is in your mind.

If only they were a figment of my imagination.

'Justice Sunday' Attacks Gays But Soft-Peddles Roberts

Posted: August 15, 2005 1:00 pm ET

(Washington) The second in a series of satellite broadcasts to conservative churches across the country on Sunday was long on attacks on gays and "activist judges" but conspicuously short on mentions of President Bush's choice for the Supreme Court.

The event, organized by the Family Research Council of Washington, D.C., featured House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, former Georgia Senator Zell Miller and Focus on the Family Chairman Dr. James Dobson.

Speakers urged Christians to pray to God for deliverance from liberal judges. They denounced Supreme Court rulings on gay rights, religious expression, and abortion.

"Disguising prejudice as justice is un-American," said Human Rights Ccampaign President Joe Solmonese. "The extremism on display last night dangerously ignored the Court's more than 200-year-old responsibility of independence. In rallying against this liberty, the speakers last night rallied against one of our democracy's greatest qualities."

Although the broadcast originally had been set up to promote Judge John Roberts' confirmation to the high court, none of last night's speakers explicitly called for Roberts to be placed on the high court.

The closest reference came from Miller who urged people of faith to "cover this confirmation process with a blanket of prayer." Dobson said he prays that Senate Democrats won't be able to turn the hearings "into a circus."

The broadcast had been set up to push Roberts' confirmation. But, that was before many conservative groups became "alarmed" over revelations that Roberts had offered free legal advice to an LGBT group that ultimately won a landmark 1996 gay civil rights case at the Supreme Court. Following closely was the disclosure Roberts also lent a hand in 1999 preparing Playboy representatives for oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

Last week, Public Advocate, a conservative Virginia-based "national pro-family group", withdrew its support of Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court.

Other conservative groups have not gone so far but several, including the organizers of Sunday's event, have been vocal in raising "concerns" Roberts may be too liberal in his views.

Mathew Staver, president of Liberty Counsel, a conservative legal group fighting LGBT rights in several states, said Roberts' involvement in the gay case is "something to certainly be concerned about." Focus on the Family also is "raising alarm bells."

But, while conservative pull back on their support for Judge Roberts, LGBT civil rights groups are equally concerned.

"All this shows is that Roberts is a good lawyer. It has nothing to do with his ideology," NGLTF executive director Matt Foreman said of the1996 gay rights case last week."

Michael Adams, director of education at Lambda Legal, said that "It poses as many questions as answers."

Senate confirmation hearings for Roberts are set to begin Sept. 6.

Or, does any one filing a complaint with the FCC grant them instant membership in the "Christian Taliban"?

"One filing"? Please. The FCC is currently on a rather unprecedented backlog, because "Christian conservatives" have purposely lodged enough complaints during TV stations' required license renewal process with frivolous "indecency" complaints on an already neutered network TV environment. They got their V-chips and their TV ratings, and they're still not happy.

Instead, the FCC is now being forced to investigate most which will amount to crap.

Melon

 

[Irvine511]

The only place your made-up organization has any influence is in your mind.

Or, does any one filing a complaint with the FCC grant them instant membership in the "Christian Taliban"?

are you completely unaware of all the boycotts organized against certain media precisely because of their content? are you unaware of Michael Powell and the FCC? are you unaware of Wal-Mart's power when it comes to DVD sales and how they put nudity of any sort in an "adults only" section of the store? (and Wal-Mart accounts for fully a quarter of all DVD sales in the country)?

 

[Irvine511]

anyway ... back on topic ... i will add that most of the women at the top of my network (and there are quite a few) are almost all childless. i can think of one woman who adopted.

 

[melon]

I would appreciate it if people would get back on topic, and, if you'd like, comment on what I posted here:

Anyway, I'm tired of this thread myself.

Summary, for those looking for hidden agendas:

1) It is NOT the fault of women that has made BBC to be perceived as "crappy." U.S. reality television, in fact, is mostly derivatives from European and often *British* television, and people here eat them up. Likewise, the CBC is also accused of being "crappy" in Canada, and they are NOT female dominated. In other words, the writer of the article here has dug up "sexism," because he's stagnating in his career probably.

2) If you want more *accountability,* then push for more open ratings and focus groups on your television. Non-commercial and government-owned television, generally speaking, does not have to a flying fuck about what people think, because they don't have to worry about ratings. Now PBS cares, to a degree, because they have to worry about pledge drives, but BBC? When it's tax supported and non-commercial, what incentive is there to actively search for shows that everyone wants to watch?

And that's it. I'm tired of this.

Melon

I had absolutely no intention of spinning this thread into a different direction, but you know the nature of the internet: once someone interprets what you say differently from what you intended, all hell breaks loose.

Well, here's my (perhaps futile) attempt to reign in hell.

Melon

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

yes, can we please stick to the subject

 

[nbcrusader]

are you completely unaware of all the boycotts organized against certain media precisely because of their content? are you unaware of Michael Powell and the FCC? are you unaware of Wal-Mart's power when it comes to DVD sales and how they put nudity of any sort in an "adults only" section of the store? (and Wal-Mart accounts for fully a quarter of all DVD sales in the country)?

Yes. Are they all part of your "Christian Taliban"?


Back to the thread.

Originally posted by Melon
Non-commercial and government-owned television, generally speaking, does not have to a flying fuck about what people think, because they don't have to worry about ratings.

Does this support a call to end government funding of television? I'm not sure how open ratings and focus groups would affect change in organizations that receive protected income.

 

[Irvine511]

Yes. Are they all part of your "Christian Taliban"?


Back to the thread.





Does this support a call to end government funding of television? I'm not sure how open ratings and focus groups would affect change in organizations that receive protected income.

1. i think it's more like Al-Qaeda; you have various cells that espouse and fight for the same basic philosophy, though they might not be actual card carrying members -- hence, i prefer the term "Christianist"

2. government funding of television is an interesting issue ... on one hand, if you are free from the influences of corporate America, you can make much better news (see Jim Lehrer or NPR for the best quality, least sensationalized news available) and you can also do shows on topics that would never air on cable because of threat of corporate sponsors getting upset (for example, we can't do shows on global warming lest we offend people who want to sell SUVs). on the other hand, if television becomes tax supported, one has better grounds for, say, objecting to a show about lesbian moms in Vermont who run a maple syrup farm.

so ... i dunno. i've always been impressed with the BBC and it is generally the envy of the world, but the Beeb does have it's problems ...

 

[financeguy]

The BBC, which is publically funded, is way better than most non-governmentally funded channels. I don't know where this idea that the BBC would be better off without tax-payer funding is coming from.

 

[Irvine511]

The BBC, which is publically funded, is way better than most non-governmentally funded channels. I don't know where this idea that the BBC would be better off without tax-payer funding is coming from.

you've never heard of the oft-complained about liberal bias?

 

[melon]

Does this support a call to end government funding of television? I'm not sure how open ratings and focus groups would affect change in organizations that receive protected income.

I do not believe this to be an issue in the UK and especially not the U.S. We have PBS, yes, but we also have tons of other options if we do not want to watch that.

Likewise, while the UK may not technically have as many options as the U.S., they still have quite a few.

But for those who ARE complaining about the BBC, that's what you get when you have no incentive for public accountability. That's all I was saying. I was certainly not implying that I think anything is especially wrong with the BBC or any publically-funded network myself.

Melon

 

[financeguy]

you've never heard of the oft-complained about liberal bias?

Yeah and it's bullshit. The world doesn't need another Rupert Murdoch channel. (But you already knew that didn't you?)

 

[Irvine511]

Yeah and it's bullshit. The world doesn't need another Rupert Murdoch channel. (But you already knew that didn't you?)

yes, i did know that. agreed.

however, in my heart of hearts, i have found some Beeb coverage of Israel/Palestine a bit biased.

but, hey, if there's one thing we've got it's infotainment ... uh, i mean information options!

 

[Got Philk?]

I missed this thread. Here's all I've got.
I'm a man. I'm thinking about donating plasma(does this make me more of a man?). And in regards to my job being my source of confidence? I want to be a stay at home dad. BOOYAH!

 

[BluRmGrl]

^ If I weren't married & you weren't already taken by Liv, I'd ask you to marry me!!

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

And in regards to my job being my source of confidence? I want to be a stay at home dad

Good for you, that's a fantastic goal and such an important job

 

[Liesje]

^ If I weren't married & you weren't already taken by Liv, I'd ask you to marry me!!

 

[Got Philk?]

^ If I weren't married & you weren't already taken by Liv, I'd ask you to marry me!!

Heeeey....

j/k

 

[peacepandemic]

He is absolutely correct that advertising is increasingly targeted to women. However, maybe thats based on a statistical assumption that women (employed or homemakers) will be doing most of the purchasing except for very big ticket items. All in all, advertising prejudice is the least of the problems in the world.

As for men being "sperm donors", it could happen, it could already be, it could be the wave of the future...I hope its not and if it is....thats a very very sad commentary on the state of "humanity" in the world and at that point, the terrorists wouldnt be destroying much of value if they wiped out the whole human race....but I like to start each day with the thought that there are still some good and humane women out there in the world somewhere.

Power has always been attractive to men (or women) of low morality. As far as Im concerned, the only people who lust after power are the weak and the hungry. its the only way they can validate their existence and or edify their existence in the world.

 

[BVS]

As for men being "sperm donors", it could happen, it could already be, it could be the wave of the future...I hope its not and if it is....thats a very very sad commentary on the state of "humanity" in the world and at that point, the terrorists wouldnt be destroying much of value if they wiped out the whole human race....but I like to start each day with the thought that there are still some good and humane women out there in the world somewhere.

I think you may be taking this article a little too seriously. There are good and humane women and men out there. Terrorist and this article will never end that.

Power has always been attractive to men (or women) of low morality. As far as Im concerned, the only people who lust after power are the weak and the hungry. its the only way they can validate their existence and or edify their existence in the world.

Power, like anything else, can be good and bad. Power can be positive.

MLK had power, Ghandi had power, Bono has power, those that create charities have power, those that give have power, etc...

 

[BonosSaint]

Power, like anything else, can be good and bad. Power can be positive.

Bono has power, those that create charities have power, those that give have power, etc...

They have influence and access to power. I don't know that I would call it power itself. Bono still had to go begging.

 

[BVS]

Bono still had to go begging.

Bono changed Helms whole perspective on AIDS...that's power.

The fact that a rock star has any president or politican even taking his calls is power.

Even the most powerful have to "beg" as you put it.