A&E’s “docuseries” Married at First Sight had its second season premiere last night. The theory: arranged marriage cultures have a radically lower divorce rate than non-arranged marriage cultures. Therefore, a group of four experts (a psychologist, a sexologist, a sociologist and a spiritual advisor) conduct thorough testing to match up couples who will literally meet each other at the altar.
With a 66% success rate in its first season, the matchmaking panel appears to have a lower divorce rate than America at large. In the era of Tinder-generated fruitless casual sex, is trusting your romantic future to a pre-arranged scenario a logical alternative to a series of dead-end one night stands?
Editor’s Note: We’re launching some new discussions and debates this winter in dialogue with the new fiction publishing company Liberty Island. See the previous installments: David S. Bernstein on November 19: “5 Leaders of the New Conservative Counter-Culture,” and Dave Swindle on November 25: “7 Reasons Why Thanksgiving Will Be My Last Day on Facebook,” and December 2: “My Growing List of 65 Read-ALL-Their-Books Authors.” Learn more about Liberty Island contributor Mark Ellis in an interview with him and read an excerpt from his short story “Temblor” here.
If there is an inherent bipolarity between hard rock and heavy metal and the dissemination of the conservative message, social issues–in particular substance abuse–are at the bottom of that dissonance.
It’s a question about how art and politics intersect, and it becomes a question about how readily conservatives will embrace transgressive and even regressive artists in their quest to more integrally impact popular culture.
Whatever our politics, it is human nature to make special exceptions in the name of art. If conservatives want to impact the entire culture, we’re going to need some bad boys, antiheros, lost souls, dark heralds, and musical provocateurs.
I nominate Ozzy Osbourne for inclusion in the conservative counterculture– although I would never want to do anything to hurt his career or jeopardize his sobriety. I contend that if you peel back all the layers of substance abuse, all the layers it takes to survive being a superstar, you’ll find that rock’s Prince of Darkness is essentially a man with core conservative values.
VH-1 recently announced that The Osbournes reality show will be returning in January for a slate of episodes. The scuttlebutt is that unlike last time, Ozzy wants the show and Sharon does not.
Ozzy claims (and who would doubt) that he was both stoned and inebriated throughout the filming of the show’s original iteration. He’s down with the new episodes because he wants to show the world how he functions without the drugs and alcohol.
And I recommend that conservatives watch the show, which premieres in January, with an eye to claiming rock’s Prince of Darkness for the center-right.
In the past few days, liberal extremists have launched a full-scale attack on the Duggars, demanding that The Learning Channel cancel the Duggars’ popular reality TV show.
Their reason? Michelle Duggar openly opposed an extreme ‘transgender’ bill in Fayetteville. The bill would have given biological males who say they are women the right to use women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and other female-only facilities!
As of this writing, that petition has over 80,000 signatures, and is growing fast, with media like the Huffington Post leading the charge! We need to launch a counter-attack, letting TLC know that the American people stand by the Duggars and their defense of traditional family values.
Rather than being extreme, the Duggars represent the majority of people in state after state who have stood up for the traditional family.
The real extremists are those who are demanding that a TV network penalize America’s beloved family because they support the truth about family, which they have always expressed in a loving, compassionate fashion.
I haven’t watched 19 Kids and Counting in years. It just fell out of my usual television viewing rotation. That doesn’t mean I want to see it become the next victim of toxic progressive pitchforking.
The next target may be your favorite show.
LifeSiteNews’ counter-petition has just under 20,000 signatures as I write this.
You can read it here and sign it if you agree.
The average wedding in America costs roughly $30,000. Egged on by countless wedding TV shows, magazines, and websites, people throw what appear to be pseudo star-studded events that aim to rival the kind of blow-out parties you only see in movies. In the end you wind up with one night of clouded memories, a ton of photos, and a group of hungover people hovering over breakfast in the hotel lobby the next day. The bills may last you months, even upwards of a year. And for what? To make your grandmother happy? Because you really liked that episode of My Fair Wedding? You can have a great, regret-free wedding without sacrificing yourself to the Wedding Idol. Here’s how.
I recently had the incredible privilege of interviewing my all-time favorite MasterChef contestant, Season 3′s Top 5 finalist Monti Carlo. (Yes, Monti’s my favorite even though Season 4′s Jessie hails from my hometown.) She’s a really cool lady and a true inspiration. She dished on her days on MasterChef, the joys of motherhood, and her new show Make My Food Famous, which debuts this weekend on FYI.
1. What can you tell us about the new show?
I’m so stoked to be hosting Make My Food Famous! It’s a competitive cooking show filmed in some of the best restaurants in the country. Three home cooks get to battle it out in a professional kitchen to get their original recipe on a renowned chef’s menu. The pilot airs this Sunday August 31st on A&E’s FYI Network at 10PM ET/PT, though you should check your local listings since air times are subject to change. It was shot in Manhattan Beach, California, at Michelin-starred chef David LeFevre’s incredible MB Post.
Chef LeFevre has worked with some of modern cuisine’s culinary giants like Ferran Adria and Charlie Trotter. To impress this man enough to showcase your creation on his menu is an almost impossible feat. To do it as a home cook is a near miracle. The show isn’t just for foodies and culinary enthusiasts. It’s also for people that get a kick out of watching someone hustle to make their dreams come true. It is truly inspirational!
I’ve been a fan of Hell’s Kitchen from its first season. There are certain elements of the show that viewers can see coming from the start – and perhaps those elements lend a comforting familiarity year in and year out — but the mix of personalities keeps the show fresh and fun.
This season, the show’s twelfth, was the best and most interesting yet. The producers must have chosen to focus less on outsized characters and more on genuine talent, because we saw less of the tabloid drama to which we’ve grown accustomed over the last few seasons.
Here are ten observations I’ve made about this season, and each of them play a role in why I love Hell’s Kitchen so much. Check them out…
10. The Chefs Struggled With Even The Simplest Dishes.
I’d love to see the bill for how much food goes to waste on Hell’s Kitchen. Gordon Ramsay has such exacting standards that he has no compunction about throwing food away if it doesn’t meet those ideals.
This season was no exception, as it seemed like the chefs struggled with even the simplest of dishes. Overcooked scallops, raw halibut, ruined Beef Wellingtons, unseasoned risottos – one by one, these disgusting dishes went into the trash bins. As the season went on, the condition of the food barely got better.
One would think that, after a dozen seasons, the chefs would bone up on Hell’s Kitchen staples before going on the show. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and we witness the same mistakes year in and year out.
10. Americans are all obese.
From the messy buildup in the fat folds of Mama June’s neck (affectionately known to her children as “neck crud”) to Honey’s proclivity for bathing in mayonnaise, Here Comes Honey Boo Boo embodies the myth that everyone in America weighs a minimum of 300 pounds. One of the best episodes involves Mama June dumping a 5 pound bag of sugar into 2 gallons of lemon juice in order to make homemade lemonade. For the record, 64% of Americans are not obese. But with shows like HHere Comes Honey Boo Boo, The Biggest Loser, Extreme Weight Loss, Shedding for the Wedding, Thintervention, Dance Your A** Off, Celebrity Fit Club, I Used To Be Fat, and Ruby, we’re just a bunch of big, fat Americans.
My favorite summer television indulgence is back! Season 5 of MasterChef made its debut on Memorial Day. And while the show promises the same excitement and inspiration as the previous four seasons, we saw some changes in the premiere.
First off, judge/host Graham Elliot showed off the results of 155 pounds of weight loss. Secondly, the competition began with the top 30 home cooks – no “audition” episodes. The format change dropped viewers right into the heart of the action from the start.
In the premiere episode, the judges – Elliot, Joe Bastianich, and Gordon Ramsay, whittled the competition down to 22. They eliminated two contestants during the cooking process. The first 17 chefs made the cut on the first elimination test, while four of the remaining nine had to endure another challege – with tighter rules and cooking alongside Gordon Ramsay – to earn their aprons.
The Top 22 come from all over the country (I enjoyed hearing so many Southern accents) and all walks of life – including one competitor who worked as a dancer in a “gentlemen’s club.” But a few in particular stand out to me – I claim these as six to watch throughout the season, because they promise to bring heart and drama to an already exciting competition. Take a look…
CNN reports on Eretz Nehederet, Marcus’s first creation.
Omri Marcus is the #1 TV Geek you’ve never heard of. An Israeli journalist-turned-hit TV comedy writer, Marcus made it big thanks to his scientific understanding of comedy, a theory he delves into in a recent interview with Tablet magazine. The dialogue provides a fascinating look at Israeli television, an industry still cutting its teeth thanks to decades of gross nationalization. Until the introduction of foreign channels, the country lived off of one government-run station that began broadcasting in 1968. Color transmissions, a topic of great bureaucratic battles, didn’t begin until 1983. Hitting the industry on the cusp of change, Marcus, 34, helped launch the nation’s greatest comedy hit Eretz Nehederet (This Wonderful Country – think: SNL meets The Daily Show) from a hall closet next to a ladies’ bathroom. Now he’s sought out by TV execs around the globe.
Not ironically (he is a comedian, after all) Marcus made a funny observation about the one thing all TV writers’ rooms have in common:
“One of the best things about my work is that I’ve been to so many writer’s rooms all around the world and they’re basically the same anywhere,” Marcus said. “They are all dominated by a group of neurotic Jews. You know, my dream is to create the world’s largest Jewish writers’ room: German Jews and British Jews and American Jews and Israelis, all sitting together and writing jokes about how they’re not getting laid.”
So, do Jews run TV? Not quite:
“The fact that the world is this global village allows you to reduce the risks in making TV,” Marcus said. “You learn a lot from other countries, and we are all, after all, just storytellers. The stories we tell may differ in details, but they should all be appealing, with well-crafted characters, leaving viewers feeling as if they’ve spent their time wisely watching your show. By learning from each other, we’re able to create great, longer-lasting, and more meaningful content.”
Along with developing a rather scientific dating game involving Google glasses, the Huff-Po contributor maintains BizarreTV, a Facebook page where he chronicles the strangest television shows he’s encountered around the globe. My personal favorite is While You Were Sleeping:
How would you feel if you woke up in the middle of the night and discovered that you’re in the middle of a TV game show? ‘While You Were Sleeping’ is the first game show that gives you money while you’re fast asleep! In each episode one couple plays for a chance to win a cash prize. The twist – only one partner knows what’s going on! To stay in the game they must answer the trivia questions correctly, or risk performing a crazy and hilarious challenge – without waking up their partner!
Other shows featured include The Shower, in which contestants sing in the shower before a live studio audience, Guys in Disguise, a dating show that requires a woman to choose from 2 secret admirers dressed in bizarre costumes and I Wanna Marry “Harry” a new FOX dating game featuring a Prince Harry lookalike.
Currently working under an exclusive, multi-year deal with European media conglomerate ProSieben, chances are Marcus’s shows will be hitting American shores for decades to come.
Apparently I’ve been receiving most of my cable channels in error, and my carrier graciously corrected the situation with a terse letter and an abrupt cutback in service. Among the fallen were Food Network and HGTV, which were pretty much all my roommate and I watched.
Since then, I’ve turned on our local PBS station many times when I want some background noise. I joked with a friend on Saturday that WETA hit me with a trio of shows to keep me on the couch happily catnapping — a Julia Child followed by two! America’s Test Kitchens — and she was lucky they didn’t air an episode of This Old House right after, or I would never have dragged myself out of the house to hang out.
All those public television shows bring back strong memories of childhood, when that was pretty much all we were allowed to watch. I started watching out of nostalgia, but I kept watching because…well, it was refreshing to watch a cooking show that was actually mostly about cooking, and not the host’s oversized personality. There’s something less desperate — almost absurdly genuine — about PBS cooking and home improvement shows.
Wow, this was painful. The oldest of the Gosselin twins, Mady and Cara of Jon & Kate Plus 8 fame, publicly humiliated their mother on national television this morning. While I normally would never cheer such behavior, Kate deserved it for clearly dragging her daughters onto TV, where they spent their entire childhoods, to force them to proclaim that they loved being reality TV stars and would happily become ones again.
The New York Post’s headline for the trainwreck, “Kate Gosselin’s Twins Freeze Up on ‘Today’ Show” doesn’t do the moment justice. They clearly didn’t freeze up in a moment of panic; there was genuine and palpable hostility between the daughters and their mother. Growing up in front of cameras may not have been the healthiest of environments, but it certainly acclimated the girls to the spotlight. The 13 year-old twins were asked to lie on national television about the impact of having their childhoods, and later their parents’ very messy divorce, play out in public. To their credit, they refused to bite. The Post lays out just how tense the moment was:
“This is their chance to talk. This is the most wordless I’ve heard them all morning,” red-faced mom Kate Gosselin said.
“I don’t want to speak for them. But Mady go ahead, sort of the things that you said in the magazine – that years later, they’re fine. Go for it Mady.”
Mady responded: “No, you just said it.”
The Gosselin girls spoke to People magazine earlier this month, explaining that their parents’ decision to put them TV wasn’t a damaging experience.
But given the chance to repeat that line, Cara and Mady went virtually silent.
Savannah Gunthrie asked the girls how their family, bruised and battered by divorce, was doing. It was this question the teenagers refused to answer. Later in the segment Mady did speak up, rather unconvincingly, about the damage (or lack thereof) that being reality TV stars did to their upbringing. Given which questions the girls refused to answer, and which they did, it appears that they may not lay the blame for their childhoods at reality TV’s doorstep. Having family vacations televised probably wasn’t quite as damaging as watching, along with the rest of the country, as their parents divorced and then galavanted across tabloid pages with their new flames.
Unless you’re fortunate enough to prefer reading or still be avoiding the Facebook trend, you’ve been bombarded with arguments over Duck Dynasty‘s Phil Robertson’s statements regarding homosexuality published in the most recent edition of GQ magazine. For the record, here’s what the guy actually said after being prompted by the GQ reporter with the question, “What, in your mind, is sinful?”
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
… “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”
Bottom line: The nomenklatura outcry is over a man who quoted a Bible verse and backed it up with the philosophy that anyone is as free to live his life as he is to live his own and we should all love each other. The nomenklatura supports Obama, who prefers to negotiate nuclear war with Iran, a country that openly persecutes homosexuals as “diseased.” Yet, the nomenklatura denies a maker of duck calls the right to free speech. According to openly gay Camille Paglia, the culture war erupting here is a battle between freedom of speech and the return of the Soviet empire on American soil:
“I speak with authority here because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall Rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so,” she said. “And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech. In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as they have the right to support homosexuality — as I 100 percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right to religious freedom there … to express yourself in a magazine in an interview -– this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. It’s the whole legacy of the free speech 1960′s that have been lost by my own party.”
In the ultimate example of framing, the American nomeklatura is using one man’s words as a weapon against him in the war over what is constitutionally permitted versus what is nomenklaturally popular. Interestingly, this battle in the culture war is illustrating what history has already proven true: The best weapon to defeat the Stalinist nomenklatura is the free market.
As the drama surrounding cable network A&E’s suspension of Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson enters its second week without losing steam, our analysis of the incident becomes more refined by critical thought. Where emotional reactions at first prevailed, we now see thoughtful consideration of why this episode matters so much to so many people.
Caring about Phil Robertson and his ordeal says something about those who stand with him. It reveals a solidarity informed by shared values, and similar experiences. For Christians in today’s increasingly secularized culture, there exists a persistent subversion of our religious expression. While it often takes the form of private censure, as it has in Robertson’s case, the influence of the state can be sensed bearing down on private decisions.
Perhaps that is why figures like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck have mistakenly represented the suspension as a violation of Robertson’s free speech rights. As reported in City Pages, the Minnesota chapter of the ACLU sought to set the record straight in a blog post last week:
The Constitution protects you from the government violating your rights. Phil Robertson, of Duck Dynasty, has not been arrested or charged with a crime for his comments about gays (nor should he be), he has been [indefinitely suspended] by a private employer for making these comments.
Phil Robertson has the right to make whatever homophobic or racist comments he wants without fear of going to prison for it, however he does not have the right to have his own TV show, or to say what he wants without negative reactions from his employer or people in the community.
While this interpretation proves correct, we need not look far to see how unequally it is applied. What if, instead of Phil Robertson expressing his Christian view of homosexuality, A&E had suspended a gay reality show star for coming out of the closet and advocating for gay marriage? Would the ACLU and City Pages and their allies on the Left be so eagerly reminding us of the cable network’s freedom of association?
Reacting to a phenomenal wave of activity across social media in the wake of cable network A&E’s suspension of Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson for expressing his Christian view of homosexuality, many liberty activists have voiced frustration with the amount of attention a reality show can garner while — in their view — far more pressing issues persist. Some have even suggested that the entire drama has been orchestrated by the media to divert attention from issues like the implosion of Obamacare or the expanding NSA spying scandal.
Here’s a sample which exemplifies the sentiment of many:
I really wish people got half as outraged about things that actually matter as they do about stuff that happens on reality shows. I am so tired of it!
If you’re more upset that Phil Robertson got kicked off of A&E than you are that a US Drone bombed a wedding in Yemen last week killing 15 civilians, you might be part of the problem.
There’s an irony here which ought to command our attention. The essence of liberty emerges as the principle of individual rights, the recognition that each person retains the prerogative to form their own value judgments. The political left rejects that principle, insisting that individuals surrender their chosen values and adopt those deemed superior by an elite ruling class. Their willingness to wield force and compel others to forsake chosen values metastasizes from an initial conviction that people ought to think a certain way. Getting upset about how upset someone else gets about something you don’t think they should be upset about… it really says more about you than it does about them. It manifests from a latent bit of tyranny which would make others reorient their values.
These are friends of mine making the above comments. And God knows I’ve made similar comments in other contexts. While that doesn’t necessarily mean we’re all a bunch of tyrants, it should trigger a thoughtful consideration of why people value the things they value.
In response to the “indefinite hiatus” of Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson for his straightforward (if inelegant) comments to GQ expressing his personal belief that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin, Democrat Party political pollster Bernard Whitman appeared on Megyn Kelly’s show on Wednesday night. Whitman said, in essence, that Christians no longer have the right to publicly express their views on homosexuality unless they only express agreement with the homosexual lifestyle. Whitman made the following statements:
“He is not entitled to be on TV spouting hate.”
“It’s time that we stop agreeing that religion can be used as a weapon to spew hate and cause people to feel bad about themselves and who they are and who they love.”
“If he wants to go out and have hate speech…if he wants to go out and have hate speech all over America — and hate speech conventions — by God, let him do it, but it shouldn’t have to be in the public square where people have to tune in and see that sort of thing.”
“You can have your private beliefs but they don’t have to be aired on public networks.”
“I think that he can’t hide behind the veil of Christianity or any religion and use that as a weapon to indict people, to condemn people or make them feel ‘less than.’”
“I think it’s a matter of first understanding what the true meaning of spirituality is or Christianity is or Judaism is or Islam is and that is, ‘love thy neighbor as thyself.’ As Pope Francis recently said about gay people, ‘Who am I to judge?’ Clearly, the Duck Dynasty guy, Robertson, is judging. There’s just no place for that in religion, I think.”
I have a few questions for Mr. Whitman and others who want to silence Phil Robertson and millions of other Americans who agree with his sincerely held and constitutionally protected religious beliefs:
Why are you entitled to be on TV spouting hate toward the views of Robertson?
When are you going to stop using your lifestyle as a weapon to spew hatred toward Christians, causing them to “feel bad about themselves and who they are” and the God they love?
What gives you the right to determine that Robertson’s comments are “hate speech” while your accusations of bigotry are not? And if you shouldn’t “have to tune in and see” the sort of thing that Phil Robertson expressed (note: Robertson expressed his views on homosexuality in a magazine article, not on TV), why should Americans who disagree with your lifestyle have to tune in to Megyn Kelly’s show to see the “sort of thing” that they find offensive?
Why should your beliefs alone be represented and permitted on the public airwaves and in the public square while the beliefs of Robertson are silenced? What makes your beliefs superior to or more correct than his?
Why are you permitted to hide behind the veil of “no matter who they love” and use that as a weapon to condemn people and make them feel ‘less than’?
Who are you to judge? What gives you the right to judge Phil Robertson or any other Christian — let alone define and decree what their personal religious beliefs should be. As a self-proclaimed Jew, I don’t think you really have a lot of jurisdiction over Mr. Robertson’s statements of faith and doctrine.
Do you not see that you are guilty of the very accusations you level against Roberson?
In an episode of A & E’s Duck Dynasty last season, Sadie, the teen daughter of the Robertson clan’s Willie and Kori, needed a dress for the homecoming dance. Like many families, daddy and daughter had different ideas about suitable attire for the dance. Willie ordered Sadie to return the first dress she purchased.
“Is there something wrong with it?” Sadie asked.
“Yeah, there’s not enough material,” Willie complained. “Does Sadie look nice in her dress? Yes. But it’s the kind of nice the boys at school are going to think is really nice. And that’s going to make me really uncomfortable. Because she’s really young and she’s really my daughter. And I’m really accurate with a crossbow.
Willie echoed the feelings of thousands of parents around the country when he said, “It’s just that my daughter’s dressed up like she’s thirteen going on twenty.”
That resulted in a long afternoon at the formalwear boutique, with Willie rejecting one dress after another (while Uncle Si modeled tuxedos). An exasperated Sadie finally used her cell phone to call her mom from the fitting room for an assist.
The Robertsons, a family very open about their Christian faith on Duck Dynasty, eventually settled on a dress, but the show highlighted the very real problem of immodest and age-inappropriate formal attire designed for teens. While part of the problem is that the teens want to wear skimpy, body-clinging gowns, it is also true that dresses that are both modest and fashionable are often in short supply.
Hoping to change that, Sadie Robertson, age 16, made her debut on the runway at New York Fashion Week last week showing off her new line of “daddy approved” prom dresses that will be available next spring. Robertson collaborated with designer Sherri Hill to create the line and modeled two of the gowns at the Evening By Sherri Hill show at Trump Tower on Monday night.
Hill, who asked Sadie to be the celebrity spokesmodel for the line — called Sadie Robertson Live Original — worked with Sadie to create dresses both she and her father would approve of.
“Me and my mother and my grandma went to Sherri Hill’s place and we all picked out ‘daddy approved’ length,” Sadie told Fox News. “She also added a couple inches to some that we loved but weren’t modest.”
Sadie said that her dad had to approve all the gowns before they were accepted into the line. She follows the “finger-tip rule,” making sure all dresses are at list finger-tip length and said that “everything is modest up here,” referring to the bodices.
Check out the previous installments of Becky Graebner’s ongoing series exploring Netflix’s Orange is the New Black:
August 21: Prisons Run on Hope (And Cup O’Noodles)
Remember Jon & Kate Plus 8? Despite the adorable sextuplets, angelic twins, and a booming TLC show, the parents of this famous family suffered through a very hostile (and a very public) divorce in 2009. It was ugly. Kate got the house, the kids, and Jon ended up with, well, all of his Tom Hardy clothes. In the months and years that followed, the news periodically reported small scuffles between the TLC stars; Kate was made out to be a crazy woman and Jon a deadbeat dad.
The spats continue to this day. Just yesterday, the Gosselins reappeared in the news because Jon did something stupid and Kate wants to sue him. My first thought was, “Wow, really, Jon?” My second thought was, “Is he acting out against Kate because he needs the income and publicity? Is he really just a jerk or is he attempting to deal with heartbreak and change in his own way and is just failing?”
I’m starting to think that Jon is doing both: he’s acting out against Kate because he cannot deal with his own demons. It’s honestly sad and Jon needs help.
Larry Bloom in Netflix’s Orange is the New Black reminds me a little bit of Jon Gosselin. Like Jon, Larry is also stuck between a rock and a hard place… both men seem to have semi-lost their minds over a woman and family that they love-or used the love. Similar to Jon’s antics, Larry sometimes acts like a spineless jerk, but it’s probably due to his inability to deal with his own demons and separation from the woman he loves. I’ve been hard on the Larry character, but, in the end, he might be worthy of some compassion—so might Jon and Kate Gosselin.
I’m almost embarrassed to admit that I watched Duck Dynasty for the first time on Wednesday. It’s so popular in our area that it’s almost considered unpatriotic if you can’t carry on an intelligent conversation about the Robertson family. In fact, so many people at our church watch the show that I’m beginning to think we belong to a cult. My own son has been seen running around Wayne County wearing a Duck Dynasty t-shirt (causing me the same consternation Captain von Trapp felt in The Sound of Music when his children were seen hanging from trees in Salzburg wearing clothing made from old drapes).
Wednesday night A&E aired the long-awaited season premiere of the hit reality series. The Robertson family, operators of the Duck Commander business in West Monroe, Louisiana, began their fourth season by celebrating the anniversary of Phil and Miss Kay, who were married before a justice of the peace 49 years ago.
Phil told the judge, “We got our blood tests here that proves we don’t have any venereal diseases.”
The judge answered, “You got good, clean blood. You want her?”
To which the judge answered, “Give me $15.”
“That’s the best $15 I ever borrowed,” recalled Phil.
That’s no girl’s idea of a dream wedding, so Phil and Miss Kay’s daughters-in-law decided to throw them a surprise ceremony to renew their vows.
It fell on Uncle Si to keep Phil and Miss Kay busy the day of the wedding while the rest of the family prepared for the surprise ceremony. He invited them out for an anniversary ice cream run, but Phil was skeptical. “Let me get this right. My little brother, Silas Robertson, nekked up until he was 6 years old, offered to take us somewhere on our anniversary? And we’re actually going to do this?”
Miss Kay said, “He said ice cream. Won’t that be fun?”
Phil scoffed, “He ran nekked until he was 6 years old.” Phil spoke to the camera, “Supposedly he’s going to put us on an ice cream run. That’s what you do when you run out of things to do. Is that what he said, ice cream? Boy, I am fired up about that. That’s post-retirement. That’s almost the beginning stages of dementia, probably.”
Miss Kay tried to reassure her husband of 49 years: “It’s our anniversary today, so be happy, happy, happy!”
Phil intoned, “Oh, I’m happy, happy happy. Don’t doubt that. You and I ought to swing by the clinic.”
A Real, Live Baby!
A good definition of evil is where we forget humans are humans and treat them as things. And if that’s the case, there’s a new Pakistani game show that is as evil as can be: A game show host in Pakistan has defended his decision to give away abandoned babies to childless couples live on TV.
No, I am not joking, nor would I be about something like this. And while I know that CNN – layers and layers of fact checkers – is not a good authority, CNN reported it.
Apparently abandoned children are being picked up by an organization and turned over to this show to give away to childless parents. The talk show host defends his actions this way:
Aamir Liaquat Hussain, who has handed out two baby girls so far, denied the giveaways were a publicity stunt.
He claimed the babies would have been ”eaten by cats or dogs” had they not been discovered by the show.
Is he claiming this is what normally happens when babies are not picked up by this organization? Or when they’re not turned in to his show as a giveaway? Is he claiming this is the only way for a society to deal with its unwanted babies?
I don’t know. Maybe these children will be loved and cherished as they deserve to be. But starting out by being treated as things and handed out as a prize doesn’t seem the way to start that relationship with their adoptive parents.
Terry Pratchett, notably in I Shall Wear Midnight says evil starts with treating people as things. I’m not sure as a universal rule, but certainly treating people as things is a bad way of looking at them. Because people – children or not – aren’t things. They have quirks, and ideas of their own, and wants, and there will be difficult times ahead for these families.
We all know about lottery winners and easy comes easy goes when it comes to prizes – but what about when the prize is a baby?
image courtesy shutterstock / Lorelyn Medina
I thought having Honey Boo-Boo represent my home state of Georgia was bad enough. Now there’s another show planning to portray Southerners as absolute hicks:
Honey Boo Boo is getting some competition.
Another family from rural Georgia is coming to reality television, with “Hollywood Hillbillies” set to debut in January on ReelzChannel.
The show follows Michael Kittrell and his grandmother Delores Hughes, known as “Mema,” as the family moves from Grayson, Ga., to Hollywood. Along for the ride are Kittrell’s aunt, Dee Dee Peters, her boyfriend Paul Conlon, and Kittrell’s uncle John Cox.
Kittrell is known as “The Angry Ginger” on YouTube, where a video he made to protest a “South Park” episode that claimed redheads have no soul gained attention.
“I made a lot of money on my YouTube channel, and I saved it all from the past four years,” Kittrell said. “I got my family with me to support me and help me while we all look for our place out here.”
Alana “Honey Boo Boo” Thompson, her mother and their rural Georgia family are the subjects of a hit TLC show that focuses on their lives in a small town.
For the record, Grayson is not “rural Georgia.” In fact, it sits right in one of the largest suburban counties near Atlanta. But I digress.
Meet “The Angry Ginger.” Warning: some of the language is NSFW.
The inevitable similarities between both shows following a Southern family are going to be there, but will the public respond well to the new show?
“Honey Boo Boo” already has captivated the public on television and her show is broadcasted on the TLC channel that has an established audience. On the contrary, the show starring “Angry Ginger” will be aired on Reelz, which doesn’t have the same reach. It will be interesting to see if his subscribers from his YouTube channel migrated to watch his antics on television now.
Last May, The History Channel (or, as they like to call themselves these days, History) aired the epic six-hour miniseries Hatfields & McCoys. Boasting such stars as Kevin Costner and Bill Paxton in its cast, the miniseries was bound to attract some attention. What History got was a critical and ratings success.
The critics had largely positive things to say about Hatfields & McCoys. Mary McNamara of the Los Angeles Times wrote, “Hatfields & McCoys transcends the confines of its age by revealing the feud’s posturing, resentments and callous violence that mirror the dynamics of modern urban gangs…” Entertainment Weekly‘s Ken Tucker said, “…overall, Hatfields & McCoys is engrossing, and enlightening about a feud that proves to be a lot more than the bumpkin brawl of pop legend.”
The first night three part movie scored the second-largest ratings for any non-sports program on cable (second only to High School Musical 2 – no joke). The second episode garnered comparable ratings, while the final part did even better, with 14.29 million viewers. The show drew 16 Emmy nominations – a record for The History Channel – winning six, including awards for Costner and costar Tom Berenger.
The miniseries even led to a boom in tourism among the feud’s actual locations in Kentucky, and the film’s success led History to double down on lush reenactments of historical events like this year’s big hit The Bible and the series Vikings.
Bitter Clingers Have Taken Over Your Television, or How America Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Duck
Did you hear that? The shotgun blast heard ‘round the world? It happened when A&E Network’s hit reality TV show Duck Dynasty reached over 8 million viewers in its season premiere.
Like any gunshot, it got my attention. I tuned in to see what all the fuss is about and am now hopelessly hooked on this revolutionary bit of televised perfection. I quickly discovered that Duck Dynasty has very little to do with ducks or duck hunting, and everything to do with traditional American values and the current American condition.
Like all great television, Duck Dynasty works because it follows a proven formula. In the case of Duck Dynasty, that formula is the roadmap to realizing the quintessential American dream. Have a clever idea. Sacrifice. Work harder than the next guy. Make it happen. Earn your wealth the old-fashioned way. Pass the business and its blessings along to your children and grandchildren. Have fun. Never forget where, or what, you came from. Give thanks to God. Repeat.
Like most rednecks and hillbillies, the starring members of the Robertson clan of West Monroe, Louisiana, are as clever as the proverbial old swamp fox. And so are the development execs at A&E. With Duck Dynasty they’ve struck more than ratings gold. They’ve struck a vital nerve in contemporary American culture. And I think they know exactly what they are doing.
Each week millions think they’re tuning in to watch the crazy and entertaining antics of a bunch of rich rednecks with beautiful wives, powerful trucks, bountiful firearms, a knack for explosives and avoiding the drudgery of work, and an endless supply of homespun one-liners.
Poor Seth MacFarlane. The guy sings one song about boobs and suddenly he’s #1 on the Hates Women List with a Steinem next to his name. (That means if they capture him, she gets to rag on him incessantly. Who wouldn’t want a bullet after that?)
It’d be too easy to join the chorus singing, “MacFarlane hates women.” As a woman, I despise the cop-outs women often take, chiding every man as being both the desired master of her universe and the despised crafter of her fate. If we really believe in Girl Power, what’s our responsibility in all of this? Are we allowing the fate scripted by guys like MacFarlane to come true?
It took about 10 minutes to pull video for the following five most common stereotypes about women portrayed in Family Guy. The sad news is that it took about 15 to pull five examples of the same behavior from the most popular Girl Power reality television show out there: The Kardashians. Praised by some feminists as career women comfortable in their own skin, it has been observed that “50 years ago, the Kardashians could never live the way they do. It’s all thanks to the Feminist movement that they are who they are – and they embrace every benefit from it fully.”
So, culture judges that you are, tell me: Is the evidence compelling? Is MacFarlane a He-Man Woman Hater, or do the Kardashians prove that girls finally busted through the glass ceiling in the tree house and joined the club?
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: “_____ and _____ are worried about an economic collapse.” National Geographic should simply change the name of their hit show from Doomsday Preppers to Surviving Obama and be done with it.
Where was I? Oh, I remember.
Brad and Krystal are the parents of three near Tulsa, Oklahoma, and worried about an economic collapse. They’ve been preppers for several years, and have amassed enough food stores that they are beginning to overwhelm their 2,000 sq. ft. home. Their closets and rooms are overflowing to the point that just to get into bed Krystal has to climb over Brad; her side of the bed is packed with canned food.
Moments after we are introduced to the family and shown around their warehouse/home, we shuffle off to the shooting range, where the family is intent on introducing their youngest son, six-year-old Carson, to shooting.
Putting a six year old in charge of a firearm sends up a big red flag to many people, whether they are shooters or not. In the end, it is a call that the parents and instructors have to make: is this specific child mature enough to follow instructions to the letter? Is the environment controlled, with limited distractions? Are all the basic safety rules being followed, and is that child’s exposure to the firearm tightly supervised, and restricted to the firing line? Is there a need/way to restrict the muzzle of the firearm so that it can only point downrange?
As a rifle-shooting instructor, these are some of the concerns that ran through my mind when I heard they were going to put Carson on the firing line, and it turns out those concerns were well-grounded.
The family can’t even get out of the house without serious safety violations, such as when their kids walk out the front door holding uncased firearms by the stocks, and young Carson is pointing the muzzle of his .22LR singe-shot at his sister’s ankles and their concrete driveway. Oy vey!