If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tampa Bay Online)   Disney should quit indoctrinating children with its pro-gay agenda and get back to its traditional family value roots, like evil stepmothers and Song of the South   (tbo.com) divider line 189
    More: Unlikely, Disney Co., Robert Iger, Michael Eisner, Disney XD  
•       •       •

1589 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Aug 2014 at 1:13 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



189 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-14 05:49:58 PM  
Also you know, Disney owns The Muppets but not the former Children's Television Workshop but the two are pretty interrelated.

Do you have the Asperger's? You sound like you might.
 
2014-08-14 05:51:00 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: With that in mind, I suggest that you NEVER go back and read your posts on this thread.


ha your silly responses are the best reason why I would! Now if you excuse me, this thread is not about us two.
 
2014-08-14 05:55:57 PM  

abb3w: BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

[www.thehunchblog.com image 850x467]

Frolo and Tuck also sprang to mind; plus Tim Curry's scenery-chewing Richelieu, in the non-animated stuff.


img.fark.net

www.theblaze.com

/sorry
 
2014-08-14 05:59:52 PM  

Confabulat: Also you know, Disney owns The Muppets but not the former Children's Television Workshop but the two are pretty interrelated.


You are very smart. I want you to feel smart, so I won't point out that Sesame Street is a different property and franchise than the Muppets, kinda like Star Wars and Indiana Jones (or Howard the Duck for that matter) are "interrelated", but separate properties and franchises.

Of course they are ALL owned by Disney now.

EXCEPT for Sesame Street, which is the one you chose to cite in a thread about matters Disney.

But you are very, very smart.
 
2014-08-14 06:00:49 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


Firstly, it's not anti-clerical for the most part so much as anti-catholic specifically.

Secondly, most of the Disney movies are based on old German, French, and British folktales and writings, intentionally.  The bias has nothing to do with Disney, it's a historical bias from that subset of literature that's inherited by derivative works.

Thirdly, the anti-Catholic bias is... pretty legitimate, when your heroes are plucky independent do-gooders who are learning to trust their own heart and rely on the power of friendship rather than authority figures.  The Church votes a very emphatic 'no' to all of those things.
 
2014-08-14 06:02:20 PM  

Confabulat: OK I POSTED SESAME STREET WHEN IT WAS ABOUT DISNEY CHANNEL.

OMG


That damn Obama driven around in cars, flying in planes. Lincoln didn't need no car, Washington and Jefferson didn't fly in no planes.
Obama is just showing that he is a communist, Muslim, Athiest, time-traveler by doing that. Trying to show he is better than real(I mean white) Presidents.
 
2014-08-14 06:05:29 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Firstly, it's not anti-clerical for the most part so much as anti-catholic specifically.


Could you expand on this? What are some examples other than Hunchback?

See above. Walt Disney seems to have had a pretty solid ban on any direct depictions of religion.
 
2014-08-14 06:07:11 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: EXCEPT for Sesame Street, which is the one you chose to cite in a thread about matters Disney.


It was a joke, you know.

We do that on Fark.
 
2014-08-14 06:08:06 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: Step 1: Threadjack

I believe we are still discussing the "eeebil conspiracy of Disney to corrupt our precious snowflakes" What are you discussing?


You aren't discussing shiat. You're JAQing off, as usual, about some inane crap that has nothing to do with tfa, as usual.

OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

You're like the Ancient Aliens guy. "I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, but it's a conspiracy.
 
2014-08-14 06:08:35 PM  
Hell come to think of it, I submitted this (now broken) link, so I'm the reason you even had this conversation.
 
2014-08-14 06:09:01 PM  

Confabulat: It was a joke, you know.


Wow. Now you were just kidding. AFTER arguing and defending it and getting called out for flat out misrepresentation?

Truly your intellect is dizzying.
 
2014-08-14 06:10:05 PM  

grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!


Not something I actually, you know, said.
 
2014-08-14 06:14:40 PM  

qorkfiend: Confabulat: Let's face it, if you are offended the President or the First Lady appears on kids' TV, I have to question your patriotism.

I'm also having some trouble coming up with a substantive difference between the President appearing on kids' TV versus something like, say, reading a children's book to a class.


It depends on if the book is My Pet Goat.
 
2014-08-14 06:16:06 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.


Let me be clear, I acknowledged that many Disney movies DO portray authority and establishment figures in a negative light, but that's to be expected. It is a TRUE statement, but there is no "OMFG!" about it.
 
2014-08-14 06:21:42 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.But that was wholesome, right?You don't seem very smart.

Smart enough to not be confused about the points I have made. I said the President doesn't really belong on children's television in a conversation about Disney TV.

To which you responded by posting pictures of first ladies on non-Disney programs.

But hey, carry on. Maybe you should go see how many times recent Presidents have appeared on Disney TV since that was the question? Is there any bias or disparity in exposing precious snowflakes to CERTAIN presidents?


boomersrememberwhen.com

Does Laugh-IN count? I know I watched it as a kid.
But to answer your question, of the 5 Presidents who could possibly have appeared on the Disney Channel, only the most recent (arguably, the most media-savvy and certainly the most Kenyan) has.
 
2014-08-14 06:25:18 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.


No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.
 
2014-08-14 08:52:38 PM  

grumpfuff: BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.

No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.


... without providing any specific examples.
 
2014-08-14 09:15:27 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Yeah. Before this insidious plan, there were NEVER rainbows on kid's stuff, and certainly not outside of Disney!
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 425x319]
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x210]

I don't think there's much question that Disney today leans left, but seriously, if that's your best argument about indoctrination, you don't have an argument.


Rainbow Brite can def. give you the gay. But i knew this as a straight male and took precautions

/ewwww girls stuff.
 
2014-08-14 09:32:25 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: It was a joke, you know.

Wow. Now you were just kidding. AFTER arguing and defending it and getting called out for flat out misrepresentation?

Truly your intellect is dizzying.


wow I just came back to this thread. The best joke is you don't recognize one when you see one.

Thanks for playing!
 
2014-08-14 09:33:09 PM  
Wow people still get trolled by BJP?
 
2014-08-14 09:41:28 PM  
I'm gonna post it again cause it's not a bad joke really.

Confabulat:
Wholesome children's television:

img.fark.net

Proof of secret liberal agenda:


img.fark.net

Now (and this is the exciting part) tell me how you didn't realize that was a joke.

Be specific, as always.
 
2014-08-14 09:43:29 PM  

Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?


Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.
 
2014-08-14 10:39:09 PM  

Confabulat: Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?

Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.


You have to remember, these days "getting trolled by" == "responded to."

inmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg
 
2014-08-15 03:37:02 AM  

grumpfuff: Confabulat: Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?

Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.

You have to remember, these days "getting trolled by" == "responded to."

inmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg


Did right-wingers really get that dumb over a decade? OMG we are all doomed. Good. I'm getting old and burn the whole farker down anyway
 
2014-08-15 07:13:23 AM  

abb3w: Huh. Looks like TBO has pulled TFA.

MacKinnon's "WAHHHH", via Google Cache:In many ways, the Walt Disney Co. is an exceptional business model. I can't think of a corporation that produces more smiles on the faces of children and adults than the company created by animator Walt Disney in the 1920s.

For the majority of people, everyday life can be a struggle, and the magic of Disney makes those struggles more bearable. Disney shows and movies gave me a much-needed escape when I was a child growing up in poverty. And as an adult, I have enjoyed the company's parks and ships.

That said, since at least 1984, many believe the company has also been in the business of advancing a left-leaning agenda. While some on the left have gone out of their way to smear his memory and name, Walt Disney the man was conservative in nature, and anyone who remembers "The Wonderful World of Disney" knows he created wholesome entertainment.

Beginning with the takeover of the company by Michael Eisner in 1984 and continuing under the leadership of Robert Iger since 2005, it can be argued that Disney has been working overtime to redefine "family values."

Back in the late 1990s when I worked with former Sen. Bob Dole, I had the pleasure to interact with Iger. He was professional, respectful and could not have been more kind or considerate. Since taking over, he has only made the company more profitable. But beyond his fiscal responsibility to shareholders, does Iger have an even greater responsibility to impressionable children?

Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.

The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Disney also pushes the gay agenda by introducing openly gay characters and couples on its children's programing. Again, that is their right, but should they be in the business of entertaining children or indoctrinating them?

Beyond its pro-gay agenda, which now includes halting funding to the Boy Scouts of America, Disney also leans left in its politics. Once again, that is their right. But going back to their children's programming, Michelle Obama has become a fixture on seemingly every Disney Channel show or Disney commercial, with President Barack Obama also incorporated in as many ways as possible.

Last year, Disney reportedly had revenue of more than $45 billion and a net income of more than $6 billion, so there is a good chance Iger and his team don't care if half the nation is troubled that Disney's children's programming is shilling for the Obama White House or any other liberal cause. They have made the corporate decision to push their adult ideology upon children ages 2 to 12, and who's to stop them?

While those who cherish traditional values may not like it, the left controls most of the media, entertainment and "education" in our country. As such, it allows them to re-educate our youth whenever the mood strikes them.

The Disney Co. does much good and brightens the lives of millions around the world, especially children. Because of that, I wish they had stayed in the business of entertaining those children and left the indoctrination to someone else.


My brain has just crashed.
 
2014-08-15 07:22:24 AM  
Mwelp, I was bored and bored cat does dumb things. Like read this thread.

My bad.


i.imgur.com

Bored, dissatisfied, and peeved cat proposes an unsatisfactory solution:

i.ytimg.com
 
2014-08-15 08:21:42 AM  

BojanglesPaladin: Ugh. Why would I want to do that? Have you SEEN anything on Disney Television lately?


Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.
 
2014-08-15 09:19:49 AM  
Herpety doo dah, derpety ay.
My oh my, what a derpety day.
Plenty of morans voting my way.
Herpety doo dah, derpety ay!

Got a chip here on my shoulder.
Don't know the truth, don't know what's actual,
Everything is counterfactual.

Herpety doo dah, derpety ay.
Voting for teatards, wonderful day!
 
2014-08-15 10:09:14 AM  
Well done Subs.

img4.wikia.nocookie.net

Good old fashioned family racism.
 
2014-08-15 10:10:24 AM  
http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/2014/08/14/tampa-tribune-pulls-rep ugnant-anti-gay-column/200438
 
2014-08-15 01:09:05 PM  

LucklessWonder: Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.


Exception that proves the rule?
 
2014-08-15 01:15:07 PM  

grumpfuff: No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.


I did not say what you say that I said.


Here is what I ACTUALLY said:

BojanglesPaladin: There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:


BojanglesPaladin: It was pointed out to me, and my [initial thought] was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.


So, actually the OTHER way around from what you are implying. I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.

But, well, you probably already knew that didn't you?
 
2014-08-15 02:33:12 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: So, actually the OTHER way around from what you are implying. I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.


My apologies, I forgot about your habit of nitpicking minutiae and just asking questions. You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models, I thought you were talking about the lack of positive role models. I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.
 
2014-08-15 02:49:15 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: LucklessWonder: Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.

Exception that proves the rule?


static.comicvine.com
 
2014-08-15 02:54:12 PM  

grumpfuff: You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models...I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.


I pointed you to the first TWO (if you were paying attention to details) I know you hate things like details and actual things that have been said, but if you did you would note that that didn't happen either.

Here are some examples from the thread demonstrating your aversion to pesky details like what actually occurred:

BojanglesPaladin: I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.


BojanglesPaladin: I had a guy hit me with a long list of poor or negative depictions of men of the cloth in Disney films, many small, many trivial, and the only positive I could think of to counter was Friar Tuck from half a century ago and even then he was a gluton and a buffoon, though at least a good hearted one.I figure Farkers in the aggregate have more knowledge than me, so I'm asking for any better examples than the one positive I could think of.


BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias. What was pointed out to me is that they mostly don't depict people of any faith, but when they do, it is usually in a somewhat negative light. I still suspect that's a cherry-picked view, but don't have any info to DISPROVE it. The Googles and the Bings are not much help, as they are distracted by depictions of gheys, wimmens and minorities.

BojanglesPaladin: Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayors to corrupt English governors to diabolical cardinals and viziers, Disney movies DO kinda do that. Doesn't mean it's an indoctrination conspiracy though. No one wants to watch a movie about the obedient hall monitor who does his duty.

BojanglesPaladin: I ran across this little nugget:
"In the more than thirty-five animated features Disney has released since Snow White in 1937, there is scarcely a mention of God as conceived in the Christian and Jewish faiths shared by most people in the Western world and many beyond. Disney's decision to exclude or excise traditional religion from animated features was in part personal - he was raised by a rigidly fundamentalist father - and in part commercial, designed to keep the product saleable in a worldwide market."



So there's another SEVEN posts throughout the whole discussion very clearly and plainly spelling it out in a way that even you SHOULD be able to understand if you CHOSE to do so. Some of these were even direct responses to YOU I think.

So I can only assume you are CHOOSING not to understand. This isn't nitpicking minutea, this is your fundamental inability to differentiate between your assumptive fictionalizing filter when you read posts on Fark from what has actually, in fact, been SAID.
 
2014-08-15 03:32:07 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models...I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.

I pointed you to the first TWO (if you were paying attention to details) I know you hate things like details and actual things that have been said, but if you did you would note that that didn't happen either.

Here are some examples from the thread demonstrating your aversion to pesky details like what actually occurred:

BojanglesPaladin: I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.

BojanglesPaladin: I had a guy hit me with a long list of poor or negative depictions of men of the cloth in Disney films, many small, many trivial, and the only positive I could think of to counter was Friar Tuck from half a century ago and even then he was a gluton and a buffoon, though at least a good hearted one.I figure Farkers in the aggregate have more knowledge than me, so I'm asking for any better examples than the one positive I could think of.
BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias. What was pointed out to me is that they mostly don't depict people of any faith, but when they do, it is usually in a somewhat negative light. I still suspect that's a cherry-picked view, but don't have any info to DISPROVE it. The Googles and the Bings are not much help, as they are distracted by depictions of gheys, wimmens and minorities.
BojanglesPaladin: Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayo ...


You really need to get a hobby.
 
2014-08-15 07:24:05 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-15 11:56:08 PM  
BojanglesPaladin: {breitbart edit} I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.

BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all,

BLACK IS DEFINITELY WHITE!! But white is actually really black!! You gotta believe me!!
 
2014-08-15 11:59:06 PM  
I'm spozed to be takin a break from all my worries.

Say, would anyone like some kittens?

www.flygirl.com
 
Displayed 39 of 189 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report