The Conservative Closet

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Locked
Message
Author
User avatar
Roscoe
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:40 pm
Location: NYC

Re: The Conservative Closet

#26 Post by Roscoe » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:25 pm

HJackson wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:07 pm
Roscoe wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:47 pm
Well, again -- I'm not losing too much sleep over the plight of conservative Republicans being fearful of losing their jobs because they're conservative Republicans when so many of them are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay.
Meanwhile, in the real world, the vast majority of Republicans (83%) don't think employers should be allowed to fire people for their sexual orientation. I imagine, once you account for the dimwit doctrinaire libertarians who believe in complete freedom of contract against all reason, the number of Republicans who "are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay" is incredibly small and, in any case, quite far from "so many of them".
Majority schmajority. Also in the real world, these pro-gay sentiments expressed by Republicans when answering pollsters never trickle up to the GOP candidates they choose to represent them. It's like the Bush wives who support a woman's right to choose while spending their lives in the political organization that seeks to make that impossible.
Last edited by Roscoe on Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: The Conservative Closet

#27 Post by DarkImbecile » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:26 pm

HJackson wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:07 pm
Meanwhile, in the real world, the vast majority of Republicans (83%) don't think employers should be allowed to fire people for their sexual orientation. I imagine, once you account for the dimwit doctrinaire libertarians who believe in complete freedom of contract against all reason, the number of Republicans who "are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay" is incredibly small and, in any case, quite far from "so many of them".
I'm curious what your source is there, because the Public Religion Research Institute just issued a report in March based on 40,000 interviews conducted last year to show that only a bare majority of Republicans — and indeed only 70% of all Americans — support nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people. In particular, support for nondiscrimination measures among Republicans under 30, who had long been the strongest proponents among Republicans of LGBT protections, fell by 11 points between 2015 and 2018 (from 74% to 63%).

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#28 Post by knives » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:28 pm

Roscoe wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:47 pm
Well, again -- I'm not losing too much sleep over the plight of conservative Republicans being fearful of losing their jobs because they're conservative Republicans when so many of them are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay.
Jackson covered this, but isn't the lesson of tolerance that we shouldn't enact prejudices of a group because of their worst members? A pro-LGBTQA, pro-abortion, pro-black, pro-anything else you are for person who is republican for fiscal reasons shouldn't get mud thrown at them because of Bush and the like.

User avatar
HJackson
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#29 Post by HJackson » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:29 pm

Quinnipiac poll released May 2 which asks directly about gay people losing their jobs because they're gay.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#30 Post by knives » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:38 pm

I think you linked to the wrong poll.

User avatar
HJackson
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#31 Post by HJackson » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:39 pm

Question 26 on that webpage: "Do you think employers should be allowed to fire someone based on their sexual orientation or sexual identity, or don't you think so?"

User avatar
Roscoe
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:40 pm
Location: NYC

Re: The Conservative Closet

#32 Post by Roscoe » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:42 pm

knives wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:28 pm
Roscoe wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:47 pm
Well, again -- I'm not losing too much sleep over the plight of conservative Republicans being fearful of losing their jobs because they're conservative Republicans when so many of them are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay.
Jackson covered this, but isn't the lesson of tolerance that we shouldn't enact prejudices of a group because of their worst members? A pro-LGBTQA, pro-abortion, pro-black, pro-anything else you are for person who is republican for fiscal reasons shouldn't get mud thrown at them because of Bush and the like.
A pro-LGBTQA, pro-abortion, pro-black, pro-anything else you are for person who is republican for fiscal reasons still supports with their votes an organization that is anti-LGBTQA etc in way too many ways. Too many of them are too quiet on the topics, and again, they're not countering the worst aspects of their party in any effective way. The only problem with Nice Republicans is that they invariably vote for Not Nice Republicans. Let's tolerate a member of the Ku Klux Klan who's okay with blacks and Jews but keeps being a member because of those cool costumes.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#33 Post by knives » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:52 pm

It's not that simple. The KKK is by its definition a hate group. The Republican party on the other hand is only defined by its members and so if it is filled with bad people working hard to help reform the party is more vital than vinegar. That's a side point though. Let's say we have conservative X who lives in city Y. The local Republican party is filled with people X basically agrees with and so for mayor and city council and governor X votes Republican. Because of this as well X is signed up as a Republican because state rules say to vote in the primary you need to be a party member. X is a bit different nationally having voted twice for Obama for example since he seemed more moderate and safe than his opponents. For the same reasons X voted for Trump (who on the campaign trail said pro-LGBT things) though is now dissatisfied with Trump and if the right Democrat comes along X would vote for that person. Is that person supporting an organization against their avowed interests?

User avatar
Roscoe
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:40 pm
Location: NYC

Re: The Conservative Closet

#34 Post by Roscoe » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:01 pm

Clearly, different dealbreakers for different folks. For me, anyone voting for the GOP, for any reason whatever, is supporting such utter moral bankruptcy in doing so that they cannot be respected in any way whatsoever. Mileage will vary.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#35 Post by knives » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:10 pm

Not even as a human? Does reformation and education mean nothing for you? How do you propose an end to bad policies and hate if hate is your reaction? No one ever fell in love being called a pig.

User avatar
HJackson
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: The Conservative Closet

#36 Post by HJackson » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:15 pm

In most US states, ie those without straight-ticket voting as an option on the ballot paper, it is impossible to "vote for the GOP" because you're always voting for particular candidates as knives said. You really refuse to respect somebody who votes for a Republican candidate with a stellar voting record on gay rights because that candidate has an (R) next to their name?

Having entered this conversation saying you don't care if conservatives lose their jobs because "so many of them are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay", and subsequently having that shown to be wrong, don't you think you should step back for a second and reconsider your prejudices instead of shuffling your reasoning around to justify your virtulent hatred for a sizable minority of the US population?

User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: The Conservative Closet

#37 Post by furbicide » Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:54 pm

Roscoe wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:47 pm
Well, again -- I'm not losing too much sleep over the plight of conservative Republicans being fearful of losing their jobs because they're conservative Republicans when so many of them are A-OK with gay people losing their jobs because they're gay.
What bothers me more than the poor ostracised Republicans – who may or may not be deserving of our sympathy – is what effects the creation of these cultural silos have.

I'm a leftist, but I would never be so arrogant as to presume that a conservative has nothing of interest to contribute artistically simply because of their politics. And, apart from ensuring the maintenance of an echo chamber where nearly everyone you hang out with thinks the same as you*, what does ostracisation of right-wingers from cultural and entertainment sectors really achieve? Pushing them all into other fields (like business, politics, the armed forces and policing) where they can cause actual damage? I'm sure we can all agree that it would have been better if Adolf had stuck to painting – and maybe, come to think of it, we could afford to have a few more left-leaning cops and CEOs, too.

*Admittedly, most people in Hollywood in are probably more in the category of weak-tea Democrat voters than staunch socialists. But I wager you'd still have a good chance of finding more Trotskyites on a film set than Trump voters, and that's an absurd distortion of broader social demographics – partially a result of self-selection, yes (left-leaning people do tend to gravitate more towards the arts as opposed to, say, commerce), but also a result of a sentiment among conservatives that they're not welcome in that industry, which one suspects is at least partially justified. As an editor of a film magazine, I'm quite familiar with these dynamics; you won't find many even moderate conservatives in our circles.
Last edited by furbicide on Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: The Conservative Closet

#38 Post by Nasir007 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:01 pm

knives wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:52 pm
It's not that simple. The KKK is by its definition a hate group. The Republican party on the other hand is only defined by its members and so if it is filled with bad people working hard to help reform the party is more vital than vinegar. That's a side point though. Let's say we have conservative X who lives in city Y. The local Republican party is filled with people X basically agrees with and so for mayor and city council and governor X votes Republican. Because of this as well X is signed up as a Republican because state rules say to vote in the primary you need to be a party member. X is a bit different nationally having voted twice for Obama for example since he seemed more moderate and safe than his opponents. For the same reasons X voted for Trump (who on the campaign trail said pro-LGBT things) though is now dissatisfied with Trump and if the right Democrat comes along X would vote for that person. Is that person supporting an organization against their avowed interests?
You say that the KKK is a hate group. I would say that for many people, the GOP itself is a hate group. For many people that I interact with daily, the existence of the GOP is unacceptable and intolerable.

So the entire party has taken on the patina of a hate group even though as you say there are people there who might represent some socially liberal interests.

The polarization today is absolute, complete and total.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: The Conservative Closet

#39 Post by Nasir007 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:10 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:52 pm
Big Ben wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:45 pm
Eastwood is Pro-Gay, Pro Abortion, Pro-Gun Control and so on and so forth. He's uh, more of a cranky, old as dirt libertarian than anything else. He's certainly conservative but he's not Franklin Graham or something. Eastwood is beloved by the Native Americans here in Montana, because of films like Outlaw Josey Wales.

To be fair being a Republican now means something far different than it did back in the fifties. I don't think someone like Jimmy Stewart or Sinatra would have liked Trump all that much.
Clint's definitely not racist, he's certainly stuck in old ways but he's certainly earned that. Tom Arnold, who I'll admit is a sketchy source, said Clint went up to him recently and said he hated Trump.

Frank certainly did.

I wonder what John Milius makes of Trump. He wasn't a fan of GWB and said Rush Limbaugh should be drawn and quartered, so maybe that says enough of what he thinks of where the GOP is presently.
Clint is perceived as a racist. Atleast his last film was.

Clint Eastwood's ‘The Mule’ is a boring, racist melodrama


CRITICS SLAM CLINT EASTWOOD’S ‘MULE’ AS RACIST


Review: The Mule shows Clint Eastwood exploiting that white privilege thing again


Review, With Spoilers: Clint Eastwood's 'The Mule' is Expectedly Racist and Sexist, But Also It's Just Incredibly Boring?

Home Video Review: Clint Eastwood Unsuccessfully Tries to Get Laughs With Racism in 'The Mule'

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: The Conservative Closet

#40 Post by Nasir007 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:25 pm

furbicide wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:54 pm
I'm a leftist, but I would never be so arrogant as to presume that a conservative has nothing of interest to contribute artistically simply because of their politics. And, apart from ensuring the maintenance of an echo chamber where nearly everyone you hang out with thinks the same as you*, what does ostracisation of right-wingers from cultural and entertainment sectors really achieve? Pushing them all into other fields (like business, politics, the armed forces and policing) where they can cause actual damage? I'm sure we can all agree that it would have been better if Adolf had stuck to painting – and maybe, come to think of it, we could afford to have a few more left-leaning cops and CEOs, too.
I will tell you what it achieves - an absolute and utter distortion of reality and an utter misrepresentation of the country.

I am an immigrant and immigrated to the United States many years ago. But I was fairly "westernized" and well-adjusted to American culture already by constant consumption of American news, and media and films and television and popular culture. Or so I thought. I experienced a culture shock because I slowly realized how conservative the country is and how it was misrepresented by media.

So I think that is another disadvantage. For people outside the US, it distorts the truth. To this day when I tell my friends back home that America is a deeply deeply conservative country, they cannot even comprehend it. Because they are not here on the ground and again going by the media they consume.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: The Conservative Closet

#41 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:27 pm

Nasir007 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:10 pm
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:52 pm
Big Ben wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:45 pm
Eastwood is Pro-Gay, Pro Abortion, Pro-Gun Control and so on and so forth. He's uh, more of a cranky, old as dirt libertarian than anything else. He's certainly conservative but he's not Franklin Graham or something. Eastwood is beloved by the Native Americans here in Montana, because of films like Outlaw Josey Wales.

To be fair being a Republican now means something far different than it did back in the fifties. I don't think someone like Jimmy Stewart or Sinatra would have liked Trump all that much.
Clint's definitely not racist, he's certainly stuck in old ways but he's certainly earned that. Tom Arnold, who I'll admit is a sketchy source, said Clint went up to him recently and said he hated Trump.

Frank certainly did.

I wonder what John Milius makes of Trump. He wasn't a fan of GWB and said Rush Limbaugh should be drawn and quartered, so maybe that says enough of what he thinks of where the GOP is presently.
Clint is perceived as a racist. Atleast his last film was.

Clint Eastwood's ‘The Mule’ is a boring, racist melodrama


CRITICS SLAM CLINT EASTWOOD’S ‘MULE’ AS RACIST


Review: The Mule shows Clint Eastwood exploiting that white privilege thing again


Review, With Spoilers: Clint Eastwood's 'The Mule' is Expectedly Racist and Sexist, But Also It's Just Incredibly Boring?

Home Video Review: Clint Eastwood Unsuccessfully Tries to Get Laughs With Racism in 'The Mule'
And perception is everything in Hollywood

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Conservative Closet

#42 Post by Mr Sausage » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:58 pm

What this thread has taught me:

1. Oppression is reprehensible.

2. Except when it's against your outgroup. Then it's fine.

User avatar
DeprongMori
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:59 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: The Conservative Closet

#43 Post by DeprongMori » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:09 pm

It all depends what you mean by “conservative”. As long as it is “the party of Trump” (though that puts the cart before the horse — it goes much deeper than that), the Republican Party is the party of ethnic cleansing, oppression of women, voter suppression, oppression of black people, etc, etc and Republicans *still* support Trump at a rate of nearly 90%. Sure, you can be conservative in your outlook, but if you are still willing to vote Republican to give Trump and Mitch McConnell a majority to enact heinous policy, you might want to do a bit of soul-searching.

I do find it interesting that people are trying to equate “oppression of LGBTQ” with “oppression of conservatives in Hollywood”.

a) One chooses to be “conservative”. One does not choose to be LGBTQ.
b) The oppression of LGBTQ is generally *by* conservatives. There is no basis for that bigotry, but disfavor of conservatives (by LGBTQ and others) is largely due their oppression of others.
c) Even if individual conservatives aren’t personally oppressing LGBTQ (and others), they still consistently vote for a party which does.

“I want to oppress you” and “I don’t want you to have power because you want to oppress me” are *not* equivalent positions.

If I see a massive repudiation of Trump by conservatives and a switch in the Senate majority in 2020 I’ll reconsider, but conservatives are not presenting themselves well in public polity these days.
Last edited by DeprongMori on Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Conservative Closet

#44 Post by Mr Sausage » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:16 pm

DeprongMori wrote:“I want to oppress you” and “I don’t want you to have power because you want to oppress me” are *not* equivalent positions.
In-groups always think they are doing the latter and their out-groups are doing the former.

User avatar
DeprongMori
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:59 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: The Conservative Closet

#45 Post by DeprongMori » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:20 pm

Please tell me how LGBTQ are trying to legally oppress conservatives. Are they trying to keep conservatives out of being able to adopt? To marry? To have housing? Or serve in the military? (You probably don’t want to equate military efforts to keep Nazis out of the military with “oppression of conservatives”.) etc etc etc etc etc.
Last edited by DeprongMori on Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Conservative Closet

#46 Post by Mr Sausage » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:23 pm

DeprongMori wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:20 pm
Please tell me how LGBTQ are trying to legally oppress conservatives. Are they trying to keep conservatives out of being able to adopt? Or serve in the military? (You probably don’t want to equate military efforts to keep Nazis out if the military with “oppression of conservatives”.) etc etc etc etc etc.
I looked back at my posts and was surprised to find that none of them sink or swim based on whether LGTBQ groups are actively oppressing conservatives at the moment.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: The Conservative Closet

#47 Post by swo17 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:35 pm

The point is: let's use the hateful rhetoric that was used during the prior century to suppress gays to suppress conservatives now. The equivalency is in the tactic, not the target.

User avatar
DeprongMori
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:59 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: The Conservative Closet

#48 Post by DeprongMori » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:37 pm

Mr Sausage wrote:
DeprongMori wrote: Please tell me how LGBTQ are trying to legally oppress conservatives. Are they trying to keep conservatives out of being able to adopt? Or serve in the military? (You probably don’t want to equate military efforts to keep Nazis out if the military with “oppression of conservatives”.) etc etc etc etc etc.
I looked back at my posts and was surprised to find that none of them sink or swim based on whether LGTBQ groups are actively oppressing conservatives at the moment.
You did express that they were equivalent “out-groups”. I indicated the manner in which they were in fact different.

User avatar
DeprongMori
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:59 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: The Conservative Closet

#49 Post by DeprongMori » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:40 pm

swo17 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:35 pm
The point is: let's use the hateful rhetoric that was used during the prior century to suppress gays to suppress conservatives now. The equivalency is in the tactic, not the target.
See:
“I want to oppress you” and “I don’t want you to have power because you want to oppress me” are *not* equivalent positions.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: The Conservative Closet

#50 Post by Nasir007 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:48 pm

With the equivalence of the oppression of lgbtq community and conservatives, this discussion, such as it was, has officially jumped the shark, and lost all meaning as it is getting mired in recriminations.

It all began as a very innocuous hypothetical questions
knives wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:21 pm
To play devil's advocate switch conservative in your statement with gay.
It was entertained as such for some posts before it became the de fact topic of the conservation and it became about lgbtq against conservatives (which was never the intended topic of the discussion).

Goes to show hypotheticals while powerful tools to engage in new and provocative ideas are often misconstrued and people forget they are hypotheticals.

This is the no. 1 reason they don't have cameras in SCOTUS.

I think this discussion should be concluded now.

Locked