Not supporting or never listening to an artist again because of his or her sexua

I look at the work not the person. So yeah I'll buy there music/movies if I like it cause they aren't themselves in a film scene and music is usually different from how they act in the real world.

So if that same artist's sexual orientation included having sex with underage kids, or animals, would you feel the same way?

^^I think most cognizant people here would assume that GoVikings was referring to human adults that were gay, not beasties or pedophiles. But if your inferring that they are the same thing, then you're one fucked up asshole.

The point I was trying to make is that some people classify all of those orientations as "perversions", based at least partly upon their natural, very negative response and internal reactions to those acts.

So if you personally would discard an artist for one of those "perversions", then you can understand why others might discard the artist for any of those perversions.

Personally, while I have an extremely negative reaction to all of those orientations, I tend to separate the artist's personal life from their art. Honestly I don't give a damn what they do in their private life. Now if I knew they were doing something illegal, I might re-think my decision to support them by purchasing their art. But otherwise, who the hell cares?

won't buy anything from celebrities that come out of the closet an admit that they are democrats. streisand, springsteen, madonna etc...

Jerikson made a very valid point, the first thing that popped into my head was "Roman Polanski". Chinatown is one of my favorite movies but I refuse to watch anything he made after it. I've seen on bits and pieces of his more recent movies and those weren't intentional. Is his work still good? I'm sure it is. But I feel like I'm supporting a rapist/pedo by watching them.

Now that's not the same as avoiding someones work because of sexual orientation, but it's still an interesting point.

just gay, I don't care. Pothead I don't care, even if they get busted for it. I do draw the line at serious criminals though. Chris Brown the woman beater, for example, will never make a cent off me.

Why do people like Jerikson always equate homosexuality with child sex and fuckin' and marrying animals. That would like equate people who go to strip clubs to rapists.

I hear it is less of an issue for the 30 and under crowd than say the 60+ crowd.

jerkison40- What you said is too extreme. I wasn't talking along those lines.

Experimental- That's understandable.

10inches- Seriously? Why do you feel that way?

Christ, people, jerikson was not equating the two things, but rather making an analogy to show how people could feel some way that you can't quite relate to. He even explained in detail that that was his point, not that the two things are the same. I always find it interesting that people can read past what is right there in black and white, and just see some kind of strawman that they are eager to knock down instead.

If my ATF turned into a lesbian, I would stop getting dances from her. It just wouldn't be fun anymore.

Should we burn every book that was written by a gay writer, fiction or non-fiction. The libraries would be half empty.

There are certainly people who would support that position Superdude. Just look at the list of books that people have tried to ban.

I can understand it. Most people want to believe that the musicians they listen to are exactly like them and when it turns out they're not, they think the musicians are failures.

It's like the story of the Dixie Chicks. They were popular in the country music world until they made a statement that they were embarrassed that President George W. Bush was also from Texas. Hating Bush was not and probably still is not a popular idea amongst country music fans, especially after 9/11, so country music fans basically disowned the Dixie Chicks.

Of course, my theory is I don't care whether they're gay or not. It's not like I'm going to get in bed with them anytime soon.

I only listen to musicians who go to strip clubs. All the rest are gay.

i prefer dancing for gay men, but only if they like to pretend they're women pretending to be men having sex with straight women pretending to be lesbians... i know, it's complicated. but i refuse all other customers. hard to make a living, though.

I don't give a shit about political or sexual orientation of an artist what I do care about is if they try to jam their views down my throat. Although there are some artists I avoid because they just flat creep me out. Like Madonna, Lady GaGa and Sean Penn. Most actors and artists are so stupid about anything other than the one thing they do. They are easily mislead and that is why most of their private lives are a disaster.

If I like their work I don't care who they sleep with or fuck. However I usually don't care for music which comes from some of those who are more outrageous anyway.

What I can't stand is the fact so many citizens, especially the younger generations, who blindly follow popular celebrities and their stances. That is when elections can get messy. Just because some singer or actor is hot doesn't mean they know shit about who should be elected as one of our leaders.

I don't care who they sleep with as long as their music is good.

Refusing to support an artist, of any type, because of sexual orientation seems silly to me. After all, it's not like they made a choice about it, not like Republicrats and Demicans and all those other immoral bastards did.

@corvus. To some degree, we all blindly follow some notion or influential source.

i heard once that 90% of all voters go for the same party as their parents.

Not me or my friends & co workers. Most of our parents have staunch republican views , and we are all pretty much moderate democrats.

You'd think it would be cooler to vote the opposite of your parents. I went through both phases, strong sympathy for their beliefs and then strong revulsion. Now I think their beleifs were mostly just a product of the historical context. Nowadays, I care very little for the way things "should" be, but am more interested in what will actually happen, how to make a buck off it. :-)

Since people are fond of quoting Churchill one of my favorites is - "If you aren't liberal when you are young you have no heart. If you not conservative when you are older you have no brain."

that's because he was a conservative. at least he addmitted that conservatives have no heart.

No quite - he said that young conservatives have no heart.

you got that right, carolynne.

@Che: Yeah, that's one of my attitudes that has changed over the years. I used to worry that the less fortunate would not be taken care of adequately without the government stepping in. But then you learn that there is no shortage of rich philanthropists in the world (Gates, Buffet, Soros (bracing for flames for naming him)) so it's only a theoretical problem - in reality things will be fine, the human spirit is, overall, pretty benevelonent when you don't have dictators rubber-hosing them into behaving badly.

^^^WTF?

that "WTF" was directed at Che- where in this thread did carolynne mention anything about taxation?

@sick liver: What's wrong get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Or are all sides of your bed the wrong one?

(p.s. you remind a bit of Payer11 with that deep, dark world you live in. You from Texas like he is by any chance?)

I enjoy music composed by a Nazi, fiction written by a pederast, sculpture by a homosexual, cuisine presented by ex-cons, and who knows what else by whomever.

The world is full of nutbars and idiot-savants capable of making contributions to cultural enjoyment.

wow....cancer is just oh so witty, isn't it?

"Cancer" Oh, my! Speaking of wit. (I take you aren't refering to my astrological sign either, huh?)

Still, I won't rank "cancer" as high as better insults I've had directed at me here. So far "sociopath" and "attack dog" are my favs.

"attack dog"? Don't flatter yourself. "Cancer" or "parasite" are much more accurate.

@sick liver:

Oh, "parasite"? Like I collect TUSCL welfare from you all hard working SC going guys or something, huh?

In any case, I'm curious - what did I ever say to you that's got you spewing all the bile of your sick liver all over the place onto the board here?

??? Did sick liver go bye-bye? Cancer of the liver make him go away or something?

@cancer- I have read enough of your comments to realize that you are a condescending narcissist with a misplaced arrogance who belittles others who dare to disagree with you. On my first post here in a long time you had to respond in your typically smart ass way. You honestly don't see how you've alienated yourself from everybody else on this board? Are you that removed from reality? Instead of being a welcomed voice in this small community, you are a pariah. You seek out arguments instead of offering insight or even being civil.

Shall I continue?

The full Churchill quote is, "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brain."

@sick liver: Um, I simply did not respond at all to your "first post in a long time" even though it was directed at me. As per my rules of engagement I let you take several jabs at me before I fired back. I don't understand why you lie about things which someone can so easily disprove by looking at the comments. Kept that in mind. There is a history of comments here. People can look at that to disprove you if you lie about it.

Also, my goal of being here is certainly not to make myself popular with others on the board, and, even as such, there are plenty who like my posts and reviews. Tell you what, since I've alienated "everyone" start a thread in which you ask if I should leave the board. If everyone who responds responds in agreement then I'm out of here. Should be easy since I've alienated "everyone" right?

I am quite fine with people who disagree with me in respectful ways. If you don't see that, then you suffer what is called "confirmation bias" when looking at my posts. When there is respectful disagreement you overlook it, when there is heated disagreement you note that, and forget about all the other respectful disagreement. ("Confirmation bias" also explains how you can claim I've alienated "everyone". Histrionics do seem to be a big part of your game though, so I'll make a note not even expect a serious attempt at factual accuracy from you.)

Now go get your sick liver treated!

Thanks for the full quote, jab. I was just paraphrasing.

sick liver: "Shall I continue?"

Absolutely! Hit me with all you got, big boy! I bet if you make 20 statements about me, one of them might even be right. Don't worry, I'm not one ashamed of my weaknesses either. I'll even point out the correct one, no matter how bad it seems!

@ cancer- you obviously have a very selective memory, so I'm not going to bother tracing back on the thread that I was referring to. l'll assume your usual psychosis is well in place, and leave it at that. As far as generating a thread to have you leave....why bother? Most here already have you on ignore, so its moot. But if I ever get that bored in the future I'll consider it. I have little doubt that you would be bye-bye by a show of hands. I think the thing that I detest most about your posts are your unprovoked attacks on those that you deem weak. Its cowardly and pitiful. Your recent response to Alucard in the racist thread is classic. No one is as witty as you think you are. Your psycho babble isn't impressive, nor is it helpful here.

Tell you what, cancer..... you go your way and I'll go mine. If you have something worthwhile to add to any given conversation, I'll be the first to give you a pat on the back. But I'm not holding my breath.

"psychosis"? I definitely don't have that. Couldn't function in my job if I did. You are swinging for the bleachers and just striking instead. Try for a single instead? If you said "OCD traits" I would probably even agree with that. (As I did RickDugan in another thread.)

sick liver: "I think the thing that I detest most about your posts are your unprovoked attacks on those that you deem weak."

Dude, you can't just look at one thread in isolation. If there is one thing I do not do is attack those deemed "weak". Rules of engagement are they have to strike at me first and show they are willing to tango. Usually several jabs at me before I say anything to them as well. (And, I'll fully admit maybe I slipped on this once or twice in the past, but at least 90% of time it's them taking shots at me first. You, jester214, alutard, steve229.)

Alutard is a great example of that. Yes, he is pathetic and weak and masochistic, but he loves to pick fights so he can lose them and get his ass raped - he begs for it - so how can I not indulge him?

If people don't bother me, I don't bother them. I even offered a truce to anyone who wanted it recently - alutard included. How many took me up on it? One person. The only thing I can conclude is that the others want flames wars. Fine, I can other way.

Reasonable discussion, or flame wars. Let's just not pretend they don't want the flame wars though, okay?

sick liver: "Tell you what, cancer..... you go your way and I'll go mine."

I'm always up for live and let live, dude, so you're on!

I suspect that more people might have taken you up on your truce offer had they seen it.

I started a thread of its own which was on the front page for at three days. I don't remember any of the "usual suspects" being out at that time.

Hey, some people just like flame wars. That's cool. I'm one of them, so I can relate. But let's just not pretend I'm the only one.

And let's be real, if I was only one who liked them, then I would have no one to tango with and they would never happy. And especially with the frequency that they do. (Let's also not blow it out of perspective. It's just a strip club board. We are not "curing cancer" now are we? So what if there some flaming going on anyways?)