Parents Protest Lady Gaga Anti-Bullying Video: Understandable or Absurd?
SodaHead Celebs
2012/03/01 21:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
96 votes
|
|
28% | |||
|
248 votes
|
|
72% | |||
An anti-bullying video produced by David Lloyd George Elementary and Churchill Secondary in Vancouver, Canada is under fire from a civic group called Burnaby Parents' Voice. The video in question depicts groups of students from nine schools dancing to Lady Gaga's "Born This Way" while wearing pink shirts with the word "acceptance" on them, meant to mimic the success of a recent anti-bullying flashmob. Burnaby Parents' Voice is concerned about the implications of the message, and the incorporation of Lady Gaga's music, in particular.
One Parents' Voice member said in a press release, "Will this project reduce bullying? Not likely. They claim this sends a 'positive social message' of acceptance of self and others. Not for overweight kids, anorexic kids, or those who don’t dance well. Not those who resist their school's promotion of Lady Gaga's 'sex sells' worldview." Last year, the group explain that it "questioned the legality and the educational purpose of posting students' images on the Internet, as well as the appropriateness of Lady Gaga as a learning resource in public schools." Are these concerns understandable -- or just plain absurd?
One Parents' Voice member said in a press release, "Will this project reduce bullying? Not likely. They claim this sends a 'positive social message' of acceptance of self and others. Not for overweight kids, anorexic kids, or those who don’t dance well. Not those who resist their school's promotion of Lady Gaga's 'sex sells' worldview." Last year, the group explain that it "questioned the legality and the educational purpose of posting students' images on the Internet, as well as the appropriateness of Lady Gaga as a learning resource in public schools." Are these concerns understandable -- or just plain absurd?
Top Opinion
-
Absurd
+23If Lady Gaga stops one kid from packing a gun off to school or from contemplating suicide because of excessive bullying, then her campaign was a success. If the pink shirts cause positive or negative controversy, then I think its stil a win-win situation for the kids. Who really cares what the parents think? Their days of being bullied by classmates are behind them.
This does nothing to prevent bullying. Bullies will be happy to beat up kids in pink t-shirts next week. Or.. the popular kids who got pink t-shirts will form a clique and bully some kids who were too poor or unpopular to join them.
Lady Gaga WILL be happy with this because it's a great way for her to get a lot of free publicity and earn much more cash. She is a elite 1% wealthy mega-celebrity who is not only extremely popular among her peers but can hire large aggressive bodyguards who can fight bullies - or bully others she doesn't want near her.
And yeah.. you can bet the poor kids from Surrey or fat kids or disabled kids or the ones so lame they don't like Lady Gaga? I have no doubt they were not invited to the big popularity contest this became.
That is exactly where you steer away from truth on two very important fronts.
1) Being bullied to death would be being clubbed or beaten to death. If a person decides to commit self-murder because some a$$hole makes fun of them, that is a horrible crime that unfortunately the murderer doesn't live to be punished for committing.
2) 'We' don't have to do anything about it. Socialism has utterly removed individual responsibility from the equation. Life sucks at times baby, and it's every single person's responsibiltiy to grow up and learn how to deal with the rotteness of people, situations, random circumstance ... whatever. If we, as a nation, forfeit to the government, our responsibility to face up to our challenges, we will certainly become the sappy, useless dependents this world has already witnessed in such fully socialist/communist countries such as the former USSR, Red China, North Korea, Kampuchia, Cuba, and now the developing Venezuela.
That type of behaviour was EXACTYLY the opposite of the type of behaviour our Founding Fathers encouraged when they created the utterly unique societal design displayed in our very precious US Constitution.
ps ... I'm sorry to see the pain you obviously feel for that young man. Wasted life is a tragedy and when it's a young one, it only makes it worse. My condolences.
The current 'Anti-bullying' waves means 'Anti-bullying of Gays', nearly exclusively. It's designed to once more portray homos as 'special victims' ..... FAR more bullied than anyone else. Further, it fully intends to make the casting of a sideways glance, by a conservative toward a homo, as a hate crime. ( exaggeration intended, but you get the point )
George Lukacs was the father of the Frankfurt School's modern design for using Gays as one of the Four Prongs of destruction in the Marxist 'Long March Through Western Institutions'. This is nothing new, folks. Marxist long range planning, in action.
Nobody supports bullying. Nobody thinks bullys are cool. However, yet again, the 'progressive' approach removes personal responsibility (ie, growing a spine and learning how to stand up to bullys YOURSELF) in favor of sweeping government induced laws which redefine what constitutes bullying, and elevates homos to a favoured class.
It intends to remove a person's ability to express the fact they consider homos abnormal, which they are. Considering homos as abnormal is ...
The current 'Anti-bullying' waves means 'Anti-bullying of Gays', nearly exclusively. It's designed to once more portray homos as 'special victims' ..... FAR more bullied than anyone else. Further, it fully intends to make the casting of a sideways glance, by a conservative toward a homo, as a hate crime. ( exaggeration intended, but you get the point )
George Lukacs was the father of the Frankfurt School's modern design for using Gays as one of the Four Prongs of destruction in the Marxist 'Long March Through Western Institutions'. This is nothing new, folks. Marxist long range planning, in action.
Nobody supports bullying. Nobody thinks bullys are cool. However, yet again, the 'progressive' approach removes personal responsibility (ie, growing a spine and learning how to stand up to bullys YOURSELF) in favor of sweeping government induced laws which redefine what constitutes bullying, and elevates homos to a favoured class.
It intends to remove a person's ability to express the fact they consider homos abnormal, which they are. Considering homos as abnormal is simply rational. It doesn't condone ill treatment of homos, but rather it acknowledges that regardless of your worldview, (ie, creationist or abiogenesist) homosexuality is just not normal. It just isn't. Penises were not designed to be stuck in bums for any reason.
When a person feels disgust toward homosexual behaviour, that is very much a personal issue and that person has every right to feel that way. They also have every right to express how they feel. Feeling disgust is NOT the same as feeling hatred. Expressing disgust is NOT the same as expressing hatred.
I belonged to a group of incest survivors years ago and about half the people who attended were gay, far in excess of their percentage in the general population. And from the stories I heard from them of their abuse, it left no doubt what they went through had something to do with it. Some of them said as much themselves. Cause they were more interested in understanding themselves than in some political agenda.
The funny thing is a cursory study of their tactics will identify the four groups:
*Gays
*Women
*Blacks
*Student Youth
All identified and all planned, to be used as tools in the Western Institution meltdown by Marxists. They were all programmed to have a common enemy too, something obviously 'evil' they can focus their venom on. ~The Man~
~The Man` was the 1960's equivalent of today's ~ 1%~ That nebulous, ethereal opponent who is rich, white, male and straight .... the four opposites of the designated Victim sub-groups. An enemy all 'progressives' could hate, but who was ok to hate. The Man/1% is the official subgroup toward whom hatred has become not only politically correct to direct, but in fact is the subgroup toward which hatred is encouraged.
Bloody sheep.
I didn't say anal sex wasn't pleasurable or that I don't do it. I do and I love it. That fact doesn't make it normal.
Does it matter whether the message of tolerance is leaning towards homosexuality? Bullying is bullying when all is said and done. It's wrong in any form.
I know I will probably get slated for this, but it is an opinions site and that is my opinion.