My question is not about what the Duck man said, but why is it important

[question everything]

Never heard of this clan but, from what I've gathered, they are in the backwater of Louisiana where one should not expect open minded and enlightenment. They live their own lives, probably grab their women by their hair and, of course, expect them to be pregnant and in the kitchen.

Why would a publication like Gentlemen Quarterly want to hear the opinion of this cave man about anything?

But a wider question: why is our society so smitten with these "reality shows:" Duck Men, Boo boo honey, the Kardashians, Octomom and others?

And then we expect people who get their information from these shows to be able to make informed decisions about, say, employments, economics, health care?

If this makes me an elitist, or a snob, so be it. Both my parents grew dirt poor, never even finished high school, they had to go to work to help the families. But they knew the important of educations and sacrificed a lot to send all of us, the children, to good school. We all ended with post graduate education and with good jobs that, one hopes, will support us through retirement.

[pipoman]

1. imo

It is because duck shit is this year's huge Christmas craze...which is much more sad than what someone said or thinks..

[question everything]

2. Indeed. Seems that A&E is now running a "marathon" of this

So we switched to see what it was about and lasted there less than 2 seconds. I really don't know who watches this stuff and if this is the "base" of Palin and Cruz and the rest of the Republican party, we really are in deep deep shit.

[Kurovski]

3. Many young people and children enjoy the show.

Gay children included...

children who will be influenced in some way by what the irresponsible old millionaire says.

If he's about the business of saving souls, he best start with his own by divesting himself of his tens of millions of dollars. The Bible is quite clear: No rich folks are gonna make it into the kingdom of heaven.

[badtoworse]

4. Did anyone seriously expect his views would be different than what was published?

The question in my mind is why the outrage was not directed at GQ. They chose to publish a piece they must have known would offend a substantial number of people.

[Kurovski]

6. Young people don't always have that many expectations as to stereotypes.

As to GQ...really? Shoot the messenger? Hide the homophobe?

These stories are a little like duck hunting, in that it flushes out the 'phobes and clueless from the rushes and reeds, so to speak.

Discussions about free speech and what it actually is, is one benefit.

[badtoworse]

7. GQ is not a messenger; it's a publication.

The "shoot the messenger" argument only applies where the messenger has no discretion about the message being delivered. In the case of a magazine, the editor is reponsible for what gets published and has total discretion in that regard.

[Kurovski]

8. True. Point taken.

And the more I think about, the less I want to know about the Robertson clan.

Unfortunately young people do watch and so I'd rather that people object to his point of view rather than ignore it--whether they are surprised or not--so that some opposition is out there for any questioning young fans to observe.

[question everything]

9. In my mind, I cannot reconcile GQ and that cave man

I don't think that I've ever leafed through GQ but in my mind I would associate it with any James Bond, or Mad Men. Somehow I doubt that even these cave men would associate themselves with anything that has the word "gentlemen," or that they've ever heard of this publication.

So, yes, I wonder too why would they seek this individual.

[rdchili96]

10. *Sigh*

GQ is a messenger hate to break it to you.

[Rex]

5. Trash TVEE.

One reason I don't miss the idiot box.