Pop Stars, Bigots and Mass Weddings


I didn’t watch the Grammys because, well, I don’t know why anyone would watch the Grammys (it’s a lot like the Nobel Peace Prize going to Kissinger — once you’ve named Milli Vanilli the best new artist and given Jethro Tull the award for best heavy metal album, I no longer take you seriously). But I heard about the mass wedding, which strikes me as crass and ridiculous (what are they, Moonies?). Still, I am really enjoying watching the bigots absolutely lose their shit over it.

“Hollywood, the entertainment industry and the political left just can’t get enough ‘gay,’” Wildmon said.

He also attacked President Obama for inviting openly gay NBA player Jason Collins to the State of the Union address: “President Obama now has invited an NBA player to sit in the gallery for the State of the Union speech precisely because he has sex with other men and is proud of it. These people don’t just want acceptance, they want middle America’s approval.”

Tim Graham of the Media Research Center accused the Grammys of trying to “flush the Bible on national TV,” while Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg said the award show has been “shamelessly exploited in support of a radical social and political agenda.”

And more:

IFI’s “cultural analyst” Laurie Higgins writes that the Grammys were “a tragic freak show” and “a gawdy[sic] spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.”

The wedding ceremony, Higgins writes, was “a sorry, sick, non-serious ceremony that looked like something from the garish dystopian world of the Hunger Games” and “a non-wedding festooned with all the indulgent gimcrackery [sic] of Satan’s most alluring playground: Hollywood.” She particularly attacks “homosexual faux-pastorette” Queen Latifah and “the Dorian Gray-esque” Madonna for taking part in the proceedings.

But Higgins disapproval goes beyond the same-sex marriage portion of the entertainment. She also criticizes Beyoncé — the object of a fewrecent tirades from the Right — for providing a “vulgar anti-woman, anti-marriage performance” that Higgins compares to “soft-core porn.”

“Beyoncé has abused her power as a beloved role model for young girls to teach them terrible lessons about sexuality and marriage,” Higgins writes. Her anger extends also to Beyoncé’s husband Jay-Z, whom she claims “seems to revel in the lustings of strangers for his wife.”

“Is it money that motivates his eager embrace of his wife’s immodesty, or pride that he has access to her body when all other leering men do not?” Higgins asks. “If it’s money, how is he different from a pimp?”

May I have some more, please? Your aggrieved howls of outrage are a wonderful source of warmth as the temps outside reach -10 degrees.

Comments

  1. says

    “a gawdy[sic] spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.”

    Gaudete! Eye think that that’s my moist favouritest phrase in the hole gawd oarful peace!

  2. Trebuchet says

    Maybe it should have been a goddy spitball hurled into the all-seeing eye of holy Gawd. Or something.

  3. gmacs says

    Tim Graham of the Media Research Center accused the Grammys of trying to “flush the Bible on national TV,”

    Food Network is flushing the Bible on national TV by showing people how to cook bacon and shellfish.

    The Sunday morning news talk shows (or maybe Saturday things?) are flushing the Bible on TV on the Sabbath. For shame!

    IFI’s “cultural analyst” Laurie Higgins writes that the Grammys were “a tragic freak show” and “a gawdy[sic] spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.”

    Christmas specials are freak shows that celebrate Pagan rites.

    The Easter Bunny and Easter egg hunts are freak shows celebrating fertility. Y’know… sex!

    Honestly, I think many would say the same of Pentecostals, megachurches, and televangelists. Actually, my Lutheran/Episcopalian father used to regularly say how big of freaks he thought those folks all were (I remembering him saying how glad he was when Falwell died).

  4. matty1 says

    Now I had to look up a video of Beyonce’s performance and I really can’t see what the fuss is about. There’s nothing there that isn’t in most pop videos and it’s certainly no closer to porn than any other scene of attractive people dancing.

  5. Artor says

    Rationalinks @#2
    There’s no hating on Tull. Ed is referencing an incident where Ian Anderson joked that his flute “is a heavy, metal instrument.” The Grammy committee completely misunderstood that, and thought he was identifying Tull as a heavy metal band. Knowing jack shit about the music they were “judging,” they gave him the award for that category.

  6. says

    Why would gawd be worried about a spitball? Are they like iron chariots or something?
    I remember a few years ago when former Sen. Zell Miller (Unhinged-Ga.) derided spitballs as sufficiently deadly against our earthly enemies. But apparently Laura Higgins believes they are of concern to their almighty sky buddy.
    (Miller’s over-the-top performance was pretty well spoofed on SNL, which mostly just quoted him verbatim).

  7. eric says

    the Grammys were “a tragic freak show” and “a gawdy[sic] spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.”

    Well, I kinda agree with that – if not literally, than figuratively as a description of the event’s artistic merit.

    Why the hating on Jethro Tull?

    As Artor said, Ed is referring to the point that the Grammy judges are clearly incompetent given the Jethro Tull result.

  8. says

    I wonder when, and on what basis, they thought Beyoncé was a good role model for girls? Probably when she mentioned God in some interview, and they just assumed, without checking out her actual videos. “Crazy Right Now” should easily have set them off, and that’s from 10 years ago.

  9. Nemo says

    It did bring the Moonies to mind, but only superficially. These were real couples, not Moon-arranged unions. One could question their decisions to make their weddings part of a televised performance… but the truth is, watching it, it was sweet.

  10. jforb says

    @6 wrong order, the flute comment was a response to the Grammy. Technically, the award included best hard rock instrumental, which wasn’t an inappropriate category for them.

  11. Glenn E Ross says

    “Beyoncé has abused her power as a beloved role model for young girls to teach them terrible lessons about sexuality and marriage,” Higgins writes.

    I get so sick of hearing that pop stars, actors, musicians and sports stars have an ‘obligation’ to be a role model. The only obligations they have are personal or contractual. If someone does not like the image or behavior of a celebrity, don’t promote them or support them. They have absolutely no obligation to their fans. If you don’t like them, don’t be a fan.

  12. chrisdevries says

    Lovely to see the wingnuts lose their collective shit. I bet they think that we atheists, being the God-hating nihilists we are, just love to revel in the shameless orgy of consumerism and idol-worship.

    This is a bit of a derail but Ed did mention Jethro Tull and heavy metal, so I got to thinking. I honestly do not think such an award (best metal performance, as it is now awarded) belongs in an award show that, for all intents and purposes, is top-40 plus hit country, rap, hip-hop and R&B – focused. There is, to be sure, popular metal music, but Tool, aside, every single band creating what passes for “chart-topping” heavy metal these days was founded in the 1980s or earlier. Incidentally, I am glad to see Dream Theater (a talented progressive metal band that, of course, was formed in 1985) among the nominees for this year’s award as this shows the Grammys are looking beyond the really popular, well-known bands for this category, but honestly, there is a massive, flourishing metal underground with about a billion genres, sub-genres and sub-sub-genres recognized by fans. Awarding this accolade to Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maiden or Black Sabbath every year gives people the highly incorrect idea that metal music hasn’t really grown or matured beyond the 1980s.

    It would be much more useful to pick a different metal sub-genre every year (progressive, folk, speed, power, thrash, black, death, etc.), select a group of qualified judges for the sub-genre in question, and do what an awards show should do: highlight new talent and bring an underground band and the genre they represent into the light. I wouldn’t mind them doing this in other areas as well but then, hey, it wouldn’t be the Grammy Awards anymore; it would be something worth watching!

  13. jnorris says

    I thought these Tea Party Christians only watch Pat Robertson and Fox News. They surely will burn in Hell for switching channels.

Leave a Reply