<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Big Brother 9: More Big Bigotry From Adam</title>
	<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/</link>
	<description>Deflating The Non-Celebrity.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: frodo441</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-4071</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-4071</guid>
					<description>...that explains why men have so many sperm and multiple consciousness theory...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;that explains why men have so many sperm and multiple consciousness theory&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: frodo441</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-4070</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:52:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-4070</guid>
					<description>I believe God is Gay...and he/she is perfect...considering that we've known the worlds population has been growing exponentially since 1960, thank god, some people see the problems of making little empires of their families...of course I understand the dilemma, being that pragmatism in the church recognizes that &quot;reincarnation&quot; is a rational approach towards understanding a greater here after, if we don't have enough progeny, the time comes when one persons body must contain multiple souls...urgo...we need more and more babies, because there is a backlog of our ancestors waiting to come into the world...one for one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe God is Gay&#8230;and he/she is perfect&#8230;considering that we&#8217;ve known the worlds population has been growing exponentially since 1960, thank god, some people see the problems of making little empires of their families&#8230;of course I understand the dilemma, being that pragmatism in the church recognizes that &#8220;reincarnation&#8221; is a rational approach towards understanding a greater here after, if we don&#8217;t have enough progeny, the time comes when one persons body must contain multiple souls&#8230;urgo&#8230;we need more and more babies, because there is a backlog of our ancestors waiting to come into the world&#8230;one for one.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Dan[wii]</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2629</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2629</guid>
					<description>Adam-

I completely agree. I've brought up the Emily Parr scenario many times in comparison with Adam's 'retard' comment. I guess this is the sort of behavior we've come to expect from this show and who's to say that this sort of buzz-worthy attention doesn't bring in the ratings. Is it fair to tell people that there are or are not certain words they cannot use because they'll be removed from the house? Should they make a list? But then wouldn't the list maker be guilty of the same crime?

It irritated me during last years BBUK8 show that Emily was removed from the house for using a word that was okay for Charley to say and was okay for Nikki to say and was okay for Carole to say- but Emily- Noooo... not okay for Emily. I found it to be slightly hypocritical. While I don't justify the use of the word, I am all about equality and fairness. If Emily was removed then they all should have been. It wasn't even like Emily was even saying it in a derogatory way- but then this just becomes a matter of sentence structure and semantics.

Was it okay for Charley to use the N-word simply because she's black? The idea that there are words Charley could say but Emily cannot boggles my mind considering the kind of foul person Charley is. What about when Laura called Gerry a 'poof' or when Charley said that Gerry was a 'pedophile'? No one was punished for those words even though they were just as insulting and derogatory.

I'm not quite sure that we'll (not you and I but the public at large) ever come to an agreement on this particular scenario, but I really do love the debate that comes along with it.

Cheer Adam and thanks for your comment.
-Danny</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam-</p>
<p>I completely agree. I&#8217;ve brought up the Emily Parr scenario many times in comparison with Adam&#8217;s &#8216;retard&#8217; comment. I guess this is the sort of behavior we&#8217;ve come to expect from this show and who&#8217;s to say that this sort of buzz-worthy attention doesn&#8217;t bring in the ratings. Is it fair to tell people that there are or are not certain words they cannot use because they&#8217;ll be removed from the house? Should they make a list? But then wouldn&#8217;t the list maker be guilty of the same crime?</p>
<p>It irritated me during last years BBUK8 show that Emily was removed from the house for using a word that was okay for Charley to say and was okay for Nikki to say and was okay for Carole to say- but Emily- Noooo&#8230; not okay for Emily. I found it to be slightly hypocritical. While I don&#8217;t justify the use of the word, I am all about equality and fairness. If Emily was removed then they all should have been. It wasn&#8217;t even like Emily was even saying it in a derogatory way- but then this just becomes a matter of sentence structure and semantics.</p>
<p>Was it okay for Charley to use the N-word simply because she&#8217;s black? The idea that there are words Charley could say but Emily cannot boggles my mind considering the kind of foul person Charley is. What about when Laura called Gerry a &#8216;poof&#8217; or when Charley said that Gerry was a &#8216;pedophile&#8217;? No one was punished for those words even though they were just as insulting and derogatory.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not quite sure that we&#8217;ll (not you and I but the public at large) ever come to an agreement on this particular scenario, but I really do love the debate that comes along with it.</p>
<p>Cheer Adam and thanks for your comment.<br />
-Danny
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Adam</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2625</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2625</guid>
					<description>Big brother here in the UK kicked one of the contestants out of the house for using the 'n' word. I'll bet that the US version would have done the same had it happened there.

So why exactly has nothing happened in this case? 
Regardless of whether people are aware of the weight of some of the words that come out of their mouth at least some repercussions ought to have happened. How else do people learn that these words are offensive than if they're confronted with the reality of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Big brother here in the UK kicked one of the contestants out of the house for using the &#8216;n&#8217; word. I&#8217;ll bet that the US version would have done the same had it happened there.</p>
<p>So why exactly has nothing happened in this case?<br />
Regardless of whether people are aware of the weight of some of the words that come out of their mouth at least some repercussions ought to have happened. How else do people learn that these words are offensive than if they&#8217;re confronted with the reality of them.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rick</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2415</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:36:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2415</guid>
					<description>Hope you're having a nice life with that really shitty attitude, Lar.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hope you&#8217;re having a nice life with that really shitty attitude, Lar.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: larry</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2330</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2330</guid>
					<description>I might be out your age range...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I might be out your age range&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Dan[wii]</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2326</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2326</guid>
					<description>Wait... so you're gay?
Wanna make out?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wait&#8230; so you&#8217;re gay?<br />
Wanna make out?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: larry</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2324</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:34:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2324</guid>
					<description>whoops, engage...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>whoops, engage&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: larry</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2323</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:33:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2323</guid>
					<description>Not discovery channel my friend only my own personal beliefs as it pertains to why we are here.  All others functions you mention are part of a societal role which man created not based on the &quot;natural&quot; order of things.  Furthermore children who result from a homosexual having heterosexual sex are a product of heterosexual activity and not homosexual activity.  You cant have it both ways!!! FYI to everybody out there...I AM GAY!!! I am not condemning homosexual behaviour or Homosexuals themselves a group of which I am a part of.  However if you strip things down to the core, the result is Homosexual behaviour produces nothing but personal satisfaction or gratification on any level.  Does not mean &quot;Homos&quot; sorry get tired of typing the word, are not productive members of society or proud members of our community.  My point in all of this is people have the right to  judge others based upon their behaviour because that is what really makes a person, actions speak louder than words...
Some see Homosexuality as an acutely selfish type of existence bucking the traditions of procreation in favour of a more pleasureable existence.  Many of which reasons are mine for living MY life the way I choose.  I am not in favour of hunters killing for trophies but that does not make me a bigot.  Those hunters out there in gage in an activity that i think is wrong and quite frankly disgusting but of course that is MY RIGHT! As others have the right to not include me or my cohorts in their activities because they believe what I do is disgusting or some how is not &quot;right&quot;.   There is nothing else to life but &quot;let's make some babies&quot; because with out that we have no one left.  Science experiments do not count, (in my books) and never will.
What then is the driving force money, material wealth??? I guess some things really are more disgusting then being gay...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not discovery channel my friend only my own personal beliefs as it pertains to why we are here.  All others functions you mention are part of a societal role which man created not based on the &#8220;natural&#8221; order of things.  Furthermore children who result from a homosexual having heterosexual sex are a product of heterosexual activity and not homosexual activity.  You cant have it both ways!!! FYI to everybody out there&#8230;I AM GAY!!! I am not condemning homosexual behaviour or Homosexuals themselves a group of which I am a part of.  However if you strip things down to the core, the result is Homosexual behaviour produces nothing but personal satisfaction or gratification on any level.  Does not mean &#8220;Homos&#8221; sorry get tired of typing the word, are not productive members of society or proud members of our community.  My point in all of this is people have the right to  judge others based upon their behaviour because that is what really makes a person, actions speak louder than words&#8230;<br />
Some see Homosexuality as an acutely selfish type of existence bucking the traditions of procreation in favour of a more pleasureable existence.  Many of which reasons are mine for living MY life the way I choose.  I am not in favour of hunters killing for trophies but that does not make me a bigot.  Those hunters out there in gage in an activity that i think is wrong and quite frankly disgusting but of course that is MY RIGHT! As others have the right to not include me or my cohorts in their activities because they believe what I do is disgusting or some how is not &#8220;right&#8221;.   There is nothing else to life but &#8220;let&#8217;s make some babies&#8221; because with out that we have no one left.  Science experiments do not count, (in my books) and never will.<br />
What then is the driving force money, material wealth??? I guess some things really are more disgusting then being gay&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Bob</title>
		<link>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2320</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 16:42:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://buzzkilled.com/blog/2008/02/24/big-brother-9-more-big-bigotry-from-adam/#comment-2320</guid>
					<description>Larry, homosexuals can have children. Just because you're homosexual doesn't mean you still can't have sex with someone of the opposite sex. You simply live your life with someone of the same sex.

Furthermore, homosexuals serve a cultural and social role as caregivers, resource gatherers, and parents in their own right to both biological offspring and adoptive offspring.

Life is not defined by having as many children as possible. If that were the case, there would be millions of &quot;worthless&quot; heterosexuals who cannot have children due to physiological and psychological problems such as erectile dysfunction, impotence, and low sperm counts.

Just because you hear it on Discovery Channel doesn't make it entirely valid. The evolutionary argument of procreation being a driving force in life has been strained for quite a while. Especially since we've developed a better understanding past &quot;Let's make some babies!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Larry, homosexuals can have children. Just because you&#8217;re homosexual doesn&#8217;t mean you still can&#8217;t have sex with someone of the opposite sex. You simply live your life with someone of the same sex.</p>
<p>Furthermore, homosexuals serve a cultural and social role as caregivers, resource gatherers, and parents in their own right to both biological offspring and adoptive offspring.</p>
<p>Life is not defined by having as many children as possible. If that were the case, there would be millions of &#8220;worthless&#8221; heterosexuals who cannot have children due to physiological and psychological problems such as erectile dysfunction, impotence, and low sperm counts.</p>
<p>Just because you hear it on Discovery Channel doesn&#8217;t make it entirely valid. The evolutionary argument of procreation being a driving force in life has been strained for quite a while. Especially since we&#8217;ve developed a better understanding past &#8220;Let&#8217;s make some babies!&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.565 seconds -->
