Jump to content

'A message from the gay community performed by the san francisco gay mens chorus'


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, california boy said:

You cannot only be tolerant of a certain group and intolerant of other groups  That isn’t tolerance is it   

So the song is teaching tolerance and love for people who, for example, believe that same-sex marriage is a bad thing and who then teach and act on that belief? Which lyrics exactly?

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

So the song is teaching tolerance and love for people who, for example, believe that same-sex marriage is a bad thing and who then teach and act on that belief? Which lyrics exactly?

Once again, to be tolerant does not mean that you agree with someone about their choices like gay marriage or Mormonism.  Tolerance means respecting people’s beliefs even if you disagree with them.  I may disagree with your Mormon lifestyle but I respect your right to live that lifestyle 

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, california boy said:

Once again, to be tolerant does not mean that you agree with someone about their choices like gay marriage or Mormonism.

Agreed. Can you point out specifically where this song teaches tolerance for people who disagree with, again for example, same-sex marriage? Isn't the message specifically that children need to be 'converted' away from such ways of thinking?

Link to comment

Asked and answered what is a ridiculous question.  This question is like saying; Can you point out when in the song Onward Christian Soldiers is not a song attacking the LGBT community    You are faulting a song because it didn’t include what you wanted it to say.  Well neither one of wrote the song. Neither song says what we wish it said. 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

By way of clarity, I'm 100 per cent fine with people seeking to convert my children to their way of thinking as long as I retain an equal right to do the same. I think this is our Heavenly Father's plan in a nutshell. There must needs be opposition in all things.

I am bothered when people who have a clear agenda to do so pretend that that isn't what they're trying to do, but hiding behind a 'joke' is a common deception that we should all be familiar with.

I begin to worry when they capture private institutions (such as the entertainment industry) to aid their efforts, but that's still fair.

It begins to feel less fair when they co-opt public institutions (such as schools) to advance their agenda.

Things start to get really dangerous, in my opinion, when they co-opt the coercive power of the state.

A couple in my ward were recently summoned to a meeting at their daughter's school. (The daughter has significant intellectual disabilities and has previously been in a special school, but she is in a mainstream school now.) In this meeting, the parents were informed that their daughter is now their son. The school has already taken the necessary steps to make this alteration legal and let the parents know that, under legislation that was passed last year, they can respond in the following ways:

  • They can assist their daughter through her gender transition.
  • They can provide acceptance, support or understanding of their daughter.
  • They can facilitate their daughter's coping skills, social support or identity development.

Literally anything else is now a crime, punishable by up to two years in prison and/or a fine of up to US$18,667.

I've spoken with the father (he's my assigned minister). He's devastated. He'd love to provide loving, supportive professional counselling for his daughter to help her fully explore what might be going on in her head right now in a healthy and empowering way that takes into account her intellectual disabilities. Nope. The school officials made it clear that any attempt to do so will be reported by them to the authorities for prosecution. Any further consideration is not being accepting, supportive or understanding.

I doubt he's seen it, but I'm 100 per cent certain my mate wouldn't find the 'joke' in this song funny at all ... or its message of 'tolerance' sincere.

ETA: I'm fully aware that historically Christianity has engaged in much of what I've described above, and I personally know Christians, including Latter-day Saints, who would, if given the opportunity, feel justified in doing so again. I strongly believe that much of what we Saints are currently experiencing at this moment in time is to teach us how to behave whenever we find ourselves in positions of power, instead of just fooling ourselves with a 'Mormon'-flavoured version of the faux tolerance found in this song.

 

I agreed with much of what you say.  I don’t understand those that feel the need to transition.  I don’t know how I would react as a parent if my only son wanted to transition to a girl.   But I know some individuals are really driven to do this.  Not sure you can blame the LGBT community for that.  But maybe you can blame the LGBT community to teach others that it is ok to speak out about who YOU want to be and to find support.  I do believe that parents have or at least should have the greatest power over influencing their children.  The next step IMO is for those parents to figure this out with their child.  It is the child that is driving this support from the school.   

Link to comment
22 hours ago, smac97 said:

No.  My use of the word "probative" is from the dictionary.

Not really.  Judges evaluate evidence and draw reasonably-inferred conclusions thereon.  All the time.  Individuals can do the same.

Let's go back to what I said

The SFGMC literally used the word "indoctrinate."  They literally said "it's our turn" to "indoctrinate."  They literally said "it's our turn" to "indoctrinate" "children."

The part about subverting parents is drawn from pretty much the entirety of the song/video.  They will "convert" our children, so so "quietly and subtlely."  And then there's the hold sexual euphemism / double entendre thing.

Indoctrinate them about . . . what?  Well, the "joke" was that the "indoctrination" had to do with adult men sexually preying on our children.  The supposed real message is that they are going to "indoctrinate" our children to be "tolerant and fair."  But what do they mean by that

From my perspective, it's kind of hard for them to say "Hey, don't take us literally when we sing about sexually preying on your children, but you must be 100% literal in interpreting what we say about 'indoctrinating' your children to be 'tolerant and fair,' 'cuz we're just using those terms for their innocuous, nonpartisan, straight-from-the-dictionary definitions."  This is particularly so given the prior history of Rosser/Sohne in romaticizing pedophilia and child rape, and in (wrongfully) assocating pedophilia with homosexuality.  That this song is still being performed after they were excoriated for their musical, and apologized for it, and retracted it, is important context.

Also, the recent explosion of indoctrination efforts in children's programming (Disney, Nickelodeon, etc.), Drag Queen Story Hour, etc., is also an important contextual element.

So no, I don't think mindreading is required.  

No.  I am concluding that.  Are you suggesting that sexual euphemists / double entendre are not "in the song?"  I hadn't thought that was even in dispute.  Most discussions I have read pertain to the "joke" of the song, which is about adult men sexually preying on children.  And the repeated chorus of "we're coming for your children" being a sexual euphemism and double entendre was not actually my idea.  Only after a number of online commenters pointed it out did it start to come across that way.  See also here:

"But didn’t the SFGMC set the ball rolling with the child sex talk? The refrain of the song is 'We’re coming for your children.' If I’m being asked to think of this song as a comedy intended for left-wingers, I have to view 'coming' as a sexual double entendre which envisions a man ejaculating."

This is, I think, the "joke" that religious parents don't "get." This is perhaps not surprising, given that the song was written some years ago and, as suggested above, was likely originally intended for audiences who would understand the "joke."  Indeed, one of the defenses the SFGMC has presented is that they previously performed this song to "friendly" audiences who found it delightful, which contributed to their decision to produce and publish the YouTube video rendition of the song.

I don't understand.  If sexual predation of children is not the intended "joke" of the song, then what was the joke?

I'm not speaking of "the LGBTQ community."  I'm speaking of the idealogues who are saying and doing the things that are also "addressed in the video."

I have several posts in this thread where I quote homosexuals and sympathetic "allies" who are disgusted with this song/video.  Some examples:

  • "You guys didnt do yourselves any favors with this one. It's borderline innuendo for the whole pedo thing that most try to avoid."
  • "I hate when these creeps entitle things 'A message from the gay community'. No. Most of us are sane, and want nothing to do with this woketard madness. FFS stay away from people's kids. It's not clever or funny. It pisses everyone off."
  • "Disgusting.  I’m gay and I’m appalled."
  • "Do they want to turn their progress back 50 years? Because that's how you get people to hate gays."
  • "Well if THIS wouldnt want to make you hate a group of people I dont know what would!..."
  • "They just destroyed decades of support."
  • "Anybody else notice the double entendre of the line, 'We’re coming for your children?'"
  • "'We'll convert your children,' the SF Gay Men's Chorus (@SFGMC) sings in a new video. 'We're coming for your children.' The song was written by @RosserandSohne. Last year the duo apologized for writing music accused of endorsing Afghan child sex abuse."
  • "Can you confirm or deny that these are indeed lyrics from a song sung by your group? I’m a gay man who finds this extremely disturbing. How dare ANYONE OR GROUP sing a song about “going after someone’s children”? If true, this is disgusting & reprehensible!!"
  • "Most gay people just want to get on with life, these guys are freaks."
  • "as a gay man I only ask this of you, can you please leave the children alone?"
  • "I have just seen a video of your chorus saying 'they want our children' wtf you doing tarring all gay men as pedophiles. Stop this nonsense now. We gay men do not want to be harassed because you lot like and support kiddy fiddlers."

And responses to a tweet about the song from Rosser/Sohne (referencing people who are "confused about the meaning of the song") :

  • "As a gay man, I am ashamed by this video. You people are sick and I hope the @FBI  investigates each and everyone of you. Congrats, just set LGBT acceptance back a decade. You people are sick and I hope everyone of you arrested."
  • "Guys, that song was in bad taste.  It's time to apologize and move on."
  • "People like you bring the lgbt community back 10 steps. Its an amazing feat for 2 men to accomplish but you’re working hard."
  • "Alt-right hate?  Even I was like 'wtf is this?'  If you're gonna do satire, make it clear, or humorous."
  • "Literally just had a gay couple move in across from us,they have a 6 yr old & so do we, my wife had them over , they did tie dye shirts, &played, I played your vid 4my wife, we will no longer allow our child in the vicinity of this family, U guys really set back relations 30yrs"
  • "Predictable response, but your failure to connect the outrage from the afghan pedo controversy to now publishing a song about 'coming after children' is a bit alarming. Do you guys have anyone proofread your content first or do you just write some crazy **** and roll with it?"
  • "You're not being honest, you are targeting children and disguising the indoctrination as love and tolerance. Its transparent as hell and no 9new in their right mind, gay or straight should condone this"
  • "This is an even worse deflection than from that time you tried to glorify bacha bazi practice (aka child rape) and got called out on it."
  • "All of the progress we’ve made as a community and then you put it back by decades with this stupid, crass and suspect song.  Take some %^&$^%# responsibility instead of blaming others"
  • "I am firmly pro-gay.  However, I will not allow strangers to attempt to coerce or indoctrinate my children, in any way."
  • "What the $%&^ were you thinking? A song about coming for people's children? This song will literally cause more hatred for LBGT Community."
  • "'We were only kidding!' Yeah, no you weren’t. Every gay dude I follow thinks your song was gross."
  • "I have no problem with gay people, and I'm not right wing, and i think you crossed the line. You can cut it with the deflecting bull^%$&. You are not the victim here. Leave kids the %$^& alone, and if you want to dive into politics, you will get eaten. Maybe stay out of it."
  • "You keep b$%*&^#g that the 'alt right' are the only people objecting. Wrong. It's people from both sides."
  • "So many gay people are repulsed by this. You aren’t doing your community any favours."
  • "You have taken gay respectability back by a 100 yrs you pathetic pieces of useless $&%^#$^&#. I am disgusted by the ^%$& stunts you pull for sick virtue signalling and hurt the fight I do to advance gay rights in my part of the world."
  • "'alt-right.' You wish. You just shook the nest of every decent parent in the country by letting your disgusting mask slip."

If I am so utterly off-base, then how do you account for these criticisms from people who are otherwise friendly to the larger gay community?

Meanwhile, I'd like to try a little thought experiment with you.  Let's take a look at these pics (courtesy of that right-wing outfit, the Huffington Post) :

55dbdb1d170000b700568767.jpeg?ops=crop_0

"Hope your baby girl is ready for a good time..."

"Freshman daughter drop off"

"Go ahead and drop off Mom too..."

55dbd3c51d00006e00145c24.jpeg?cache=zt5s

"She called you daddy for 18yrs, now its OUR TURN."

55dbd3ed1d00002f00145c25.jpeg?ops=scalef

"Thank You Fathers for your Freshman Daughters."

What do you glean from these photographs?  Do you really need to be a "mindreader" to ascertain, or at least make an educated and reasonably-informed guess, what these idiot fratboys were saying?  What their motives were?

As one guy guy said (regarding the SFGMC song/video) : "I get that this is a joke, but it’s like frat houses I’ve seen with signs for freshers arriving on campus 'Fathers, kiss your virgin daughters goodbye'. It’s a joke, but it’s in terrible taste and does not win them any fans or sympathy.

Yep.

But the theme - the sexualization of children - is in both instances.

I think there are large swaths of the gay community who are disgusted by the song/video.  Who viewed it and came away with the same understanding I did.  Who like me oppose the idea of strangers subverting parents to "indoctrinate" children.  Who like me oppose the wrongful association of homosexuality to pedophilia. 

No, it would not.

I think it is.  The longer the song is out, the more times it was performed, the more opportunity those performing it and/or listening to it had for introspection about it.  This is particularly so given the track record of Rosser/Sohne, who just last year acknowledged and apologized for creating a musical that romanticized/fetishized child rape and pedophilia, and wronfully associated pedophilia with homosexuality.

Nope.  Again, judges review evidence and reach informed conclusions all the time, including conclusions that may contravene the denials of a party found to be in the wrong.

We as individuals can also review the material, survey the context, evaluate probative evidence, and reason a conclusion.  That doesn't mean I'm certain I am correct.  But so far I have not seem much to dissuade me from the conclusion I have reached.

From Afghani homosexuals, yes.

From the targets of the song/video?  Not so much.  And the SFGMC has likewise not only not apologized, but has also doubled down about the song.

"Them" being Rosser/Sohne?

A loaded question.

"Conclusive" evidence is rarely available.

And again, I have not made an assumption.  I have reached a conclusion.

Again, look at the above quotes from people who are aligned with and/or part of the gay community.  

Thanks,

-Smac

You  keep repeating this post where you are lifting Anonymous comments from an unlinked Internet site to support your opinion.   Do you really think that is a credible idea? Do you have any idea the kind of quotes any of us could pour into this board from anonymous comments off the Internet about the Mormon church?  Would you feel that those comments added validity to our arguments?   
 

I would ask you to reconsider using that tactic before it comes and bites you big time on every subject in this form.  

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Agreed. Can you point out specifically where this song teaches tolerance for people who disagree with, again for example, same-sex marriage? Isn't the message specifically that children need to be 'converted' away from such ways of thinking?

Asked and answered what is a ridiculous question.  This question is like saying; Can you point out when in the song Onward Christian Soldiers is not a song attacking the LGBT community    You are faulting a song because it didn’t include what you wanted it to say.  Well neither one of wrote the song. Neither song says what we wish it said. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, california boy said:

You  keep repeating this post where you are lifting Anonymous comments from an unlinked Internet site to support your opinion.   

Yes.  Because some keep trying to characterize an adverse response and perspective and interpretation of the song/video as ideosyncratic and bigoted.

I am posting reactions similar to my own to show that this adverse/critical interpretation and understanding of the song/video is reflected by many others (and hence not ideosyncratic), and by others who are gay or sympathetic to the gay community (and hence are not susceptible to accusations of their reaction being rooted in bigotry).

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Do you really think that is a credible idea?

To rebut arguments of "Oh, you are misinterpreting the video"?  Yes.  Yes I do.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Do you have any idea the kind of quotes any of us could pour into this board from anonymous comments off the Internet about the Mormon church?  

Yes.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Would you feel that those comments added validity to our arguments?

If the argument was that an adverse response and perspective and interpretation of the song/video as ideosyncratic and bigoted, then yes.

2 hours ago, california boy said:

I would ask you to reconsider using that tactic before it comes and bites you big time on every subject in this form.  

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...