
Though Lambert said his goal was "not to piss people off, it was to promote freedom of expression and artistic freedom", I think that freedom of expression and artistic freedom can be promoted without simulated oral sex on prime time TV, call me crazy... See,"Freedom of expression" is not synonymous with "immoral, over sexualized behavior" contrary to the belief of some (mainly liberals and the ACLU).

I love how Adam Lambert wants to be the beacon of "freedom of expression". His self righteous attitude is overwhelming. Gadzillions of more talented men (and women...wouldn't want to discriminate) have come before him, but this twit in leather pants, with a gelled pompadour and eye liner is going to revolutionize the world and fight for artistic freedom for all....

I'm tired of sexual depravity in the name of "equal rights" and "free expression". Yes, you are free to express yourself, and yes, you have freedom of speech guaranteed in the Constitution, but have you ever heard of basic decency and morality? Guess what? Not everything has to be on display for the world to see in order for it to be legit, meaningful and accepted.

I have nothing against two men loving each other, I see nothing wrong with the gay lifestyle. Everyone should be able to love whomever they fall in love with as far as I care. To each his own. I just don't think it needs to be put on display constantly. Sexuality doesn't need to be flaunted by gays or straights. Its that need for attention and ridiculous over the top behavior that actually hurts the gay movement and prevents the level of acceptance from mainstream America that they so desperately seek.

I just get really sick of the gay movement using shock factor to seek acceptance. Gay pride? Absolutely, I can get behind anyone wanting to be proud of who they are. But it doesn't have to mean a parade full of men in bondage outfits, boas, wigs and thongs screaming "We're here! We're queer! Get used to it!" while twittering and dancing down the street at noon on a Saturday for all to see.

When women were fighting for equal rights you didn't see them bouncing around naked and shaking their boobs demanding the vote. The civil rights movement did not find black people in bondage whipping each other with ball gags in their mouths-so why do so many gay rights parades/protests involve pornographic dress and behavior?!?! How do they expect to be taken seriously in the eyes of anyone when they act like that? I'm tired of the gay rights crowd using blatant porn for pure spectacle. I'd be just as grossed out of a man and a women sucked deep throat like Adam did to his band mate, it's not the man on man thing, it's the fact that two people don't need to stick tongues down each others throats on network TV during prime time when my kids are watching. That level of overt sexual behavior belongs in the bedroom, not on the street and certainly not on TV without a warning. I'm not a prude, honest-my kids weren't hatched from eggs. I'm just a mom.

The gay rights movement needs to focus the attention on what they have to say, instead of who is saying it, so they can make a well reasoned argument for how they should be treated "just like everyone else". See, the "everyone else" they want to be like doesn't wear sequined bras, body glitter and clownish drag makeup. If gays want to be accepted by mainstream society, maybe they should try regular, albeit incredibly fashionable, clothing instead of peacock feathered boas and sequined thongs. If Adam Lambert wants to be taken seriously, then perhaps he should focus more on trying to sing on key without screeching than on grabbing his crotch just to get headlines.
3 comments:
I'm hopelessly lost in another time. It's difficult to express how repulsive these displays are. Many friends would tell me to "lighten up" and relax, that it's just free expression, and really what is wrong with it. In other words it's just a display of diversity. I long for a another time but alas, live in this one. Thanks for a great blog.
You don't want your children to see indecent images on TV? Well then, I suggest you control the time they spend watching TV a bit better. ;) How many hours do they spend in front of the TV per day?...
No Tanya, I prefer my children *not* be explosed to vulgarity or oversexualized behavior during prime time viewing hours. My children actually watch 1 hour of TV per day, which is Sesame Street. Our TV isn't even in our main living area, we have go to a guest bedroom to watch TV. The fact that I want my children protected from violence and vulgarity is irrelevant to the amount of TV they watch, one could easily watch 5 minutes of TV a day and see a violent image. Your implication that we allow our kids to be couch potatoes is a silly ad hominem attack. My kids are 1 and 2 years old, they have very little interest or attention span for TV.
To speak to your point about "controlling" the time they do watch- as I pointed out above, we have that handled. A parent is able to have a certain expectation for decent content during prime time television. TV networks know that families watch TV together during those hours. Also, there is a reasonable expectation that you wouldn't see overly sexual behavior on what is supposed to be a classy awards show. While my family didn't personally watch this (like I mentioned, we don't watch too much TV-we stay busy chasing two toddlers around) I did see it via a clip emailed to me from someone else that thought it was in poor taste in general-and she isn't even a parent. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that many people, including families, make a night of watching awards shows, seeing it as a special event. Nobody should have to worry about bondage and seeing people stick tongues down one anothers throats during an awards show, that type of low-brow spectacle is more suited for MTV. Hope I've cleared some things up for you.
Post a Comment