Duck Fucked

The Scene

1.   The patriarch in a wildly popular family reality TV show "Duck Dynasty" aired in God's Own Country, is interviewed by GQ magazine. He declares his christian faith and states that in his opinion, vaginal sex is more desirable than male anal sex. He then talks about sin.

The actual quotes:

"It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.........

Q:  What in your mind is sinful?  

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.” 

-----What The Duck? by Drew Magarry, GQ, January 2014 quoting Phil Robertson of "Duck Dynasty"

2.   Gay activists pounce, shrieking wildly and issuing statements condemning the "vile" views expressed by the man. Demands are made that the man apologize, that the TV network that airs his reality show be boycotted and that the TV network take action against the man.

3.   The network suspends him from further participation in his family's reality show, citing damage to the network's brand and concerns raised by its gay employees.

4.   At the same time, there is a massive outpouring of support for the man and his views. There are threats to boycott the TV network if they take any action against the man or the show. Merchandise related to the show flies off the shelves.

5.   The family at the centre of the reality TV show threaten to walk away from the show now if any action is taken against the patriarch. They re-affirm their christian faith. The network owns the series and the intellectual property rights attached to that series for the upcoming 5th season.

6.   The network is caught in a dilemma:

• If they maintain their position against the patriarch, the family walks, they risk losing their highest rated show and incurring public anger;
• If they bring him back to the show, they risk looking weak and incurring public anger for removing him in the first place;
• If they axe the show after the 5th season, they'll still look weak and will have killed off a popular show and still incur public anger;

7.   Gay activists are stunned by the backlash they have received and have found themselves on the defensive.


Comment

Purrrr.....fect.......the Perfect Storm where freedom of expression meets freedom of religion, meets diversity and tolerance, meets family unity, meets shrieking gay activists, meets public backlash, meets "find-the-real-bigot"............

Somebody is really getting fucked this holiday season, but who and why......??


1.   Should He Have Been Interviewed by GQ...??

As much as GQ features pretty guys, FuelMix can barely understand shit what they publish. We can't figure out whether GQ is actually urban highbrow hip, or just plain incomprehensible and annoying. And if Phil Robertson is the evangelical christian Lousiana hick (a filthy rich one, apparently) what the hell were his minders (i.e. the TV network) thinking in consenting to an interview by GQ of all people....and then not controlling it properly??  It's unlikely that GQ readers are at the forefront of his fan base.

Bad decision, right there. 


2.   We're All Bigots - Face It

Robertson openly admits to bible-thumping and has a large christian following in God's Own Country. It's not surprising that any comments he makes in the contexts of morality and sin would be coloured by what he perceives as the dictates of his faith as contained in the Bible.

And there's a whole swathe of land in God's Own Country, including rural Louisiana where Robertson is located and Duck Dynasty is filmed, that is known as The Bible Belt. We suspect that   millions living there would express identical views. Exactly how does one propose to boycott them......?

Does that make Robertson a bigot or a homophobe? Hardly. He's simply using the Bible as his moral compass, even if his utterances sound quaintly archaic and faintly amusing. Whether or not a person professes a religion, every person operates from some level of morality.  It may be doctrinal, logical, intuitive (or even warped) but every person has it. In other words every person filters morality and sin through their own perceptual lens.

On the continuum of morality, everyone's a bigot. To assert that Robertson should be condemned for the non-violent assertion of his views, is more despicable than the views he actually expressed.


3.   Fags And Bestiality

Gay activists shrieked that Roberston equated gay sex to bestiality. That's not how we read the quote. It seems to us that he was talking about the inevitable extensions of "sin" as he defined it in a religious context. In other words, his examples were gradations of debauchery. If gay activists claim that he equated gay sex to bestiality, they also have to admit (as implied in Robertson's quote) that gay sex also equates to adultery and bisexuality which in many (closet) cases, it does.

And by the way, check these out:

"OOoh....aren't you a hot little puppy...??!!"
"Dude, you're humping my leg again...."
"You're just a horny dog...."
"Man....those two are fucking like animals"
" I wanna fuck him doggy style..."
"He's a real pig..."
"He likes to drink piss from the trough...."
"He's horse hung"
"He's a fuckin' stud"

Get it...??  Whether or not its admitted in polite company,  virtual bestiality, by metaphor or simile, is built into the faggot vocabulary.

So....um......why the outrage....??

From our perch halfway around the world, gay activists distorted and misconstrued Roberston's quote.


4.   How To Fuck Up As A Gay Activist

We've never been impressed by this crowd. They're listed in our Awkward Questions that triggered this blog. Their performance in the Robertson case can only be described as an utter fiasco, fully deserving of the backlash that they received.

There was:

• a failure to perceive - that a differing viewpoint expressed in a non-threatening religious context does not and could not equal hate. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are concurrent liberties;
• a failure to engage - to rationally articulate that other segments of society are not strictly bound by religious doctrine and have a more open view on gays. 
• a failure to differentiate - to realize 2 fundamental non-constitutional rights that are actually universal: a person has the right to be homophobic (so long as it is not expressed in a threatening manner); and a person has the right to be supportive of gays;
• a failure to tolerate - a differing viewpoint.  This was the most galling aspect of their tactic. The gay activists were quite happy to screech so long as it resulted in somebody (whose view they didn't like) being silenced. This is the toxicity of Political Correctness - and is the reason why this blog refuses to be bound by politically correct thought and speech.

“I think that this intolerance by gay activists toward the full spectrum of human beliefs is a sign of immaturity, juvenility.......This is not the mark of a true intellectual life. This is why there is no cultural life now in the U.S. Why nothing is of interest coming from the major media in terms of cultural criticism.................

There is a dialogue going on human civilization, for heaven sakes. It’s not just this monologue coming from fanatics who have displaced the religious beliefs of their parents into a political movement.........And that is what happened to feminism, and that is what happened to gay activism, a fanaticism.”

-----Paglia, Duck Dynasty uproar 'utterly facist, utterly Stalinist', by Caroline May, Daily Caller, 19 December 2013