Because of the press coverage my new book, Primetime Propaganda, is getting, many people are asking whether there’s truly any impact to entertaining TV. If television is such a powerful medium, they wonder, how was Ronald Reagan elected? George H.W. Bush? George W. Bush? How could we have had the Republican Revolution of 1994, or the Tea Party resurgence of 2010?
The answer, of course, is that television has shifted our values least with regard to big government, and most with regard to social values. This makes perfect sense, since television is specifically designed to manipulate you emotionally by exploiting interpersonal feelings – and playing on interpersonal feelings is a tactic the left has long used to establish its dominance with regard to social issues.
Take, for example, the issue of same sex marriage, which has become a dividing line not just in Hollywood, but across America politically. The left is fond of asking whether you can be anti-same sex marriage if you have a gay relative or friend. The argument seems to be that if you are personally close to someone who has sex with members of the same gender, you cannot oppose their behavior or, more appropriately, the enshrinement of their behavior in law. There is no real logic to this argument, of course – but it is tremendously effective. Most of us don’t want to seem unsympathetic, particularly to those we care about – we don’t want to seem intolerant and cold-hearted.
Television makes this same argument in a unique way. Instead of playing on your current friends and family, television creates a group of friends for you. The whole goal of television writers is to create a set of characters who are likable, witty, funny, enjoyable to hang around with. That’s how they draw you in, week after week. The truth is that we actually spend more time with television characters we like than our own family members; according to Nielsen, the television is on an average of 6 hours, 47 minutes each day. Each week, the average child watches 1,680 minutes of television – over the year, that’s 1,456 hours of television.
Then, once you’re hooked on a character, they have that character pursue activities and lifestyle choices with which you disagree. Murphy Brown didn’t start off as a loud and proud unwed mother – she did that after you’d bought in. Neither did Rachel Green from Friends. Even Ellen didn’t start off as a lesbian in her own sitcom.
With regard to gay characters, the story is a little different – the characters usually do start off as gay (with the exception of Ellen), and they’re usually the nicest, most wonderful people on the show. When you watched Friends and saw a lesbian wedding during the first season, know that co-creator Marta Kauffman intended it as a way of propagandizing you. When you watch Glee and see Kurt acting with all the personal honor of the Pope, know that show creator Ryan Murphy, who happens to be gay, is yanking your chain. When you see the gay neighbors on Wisteria Lane, understand that Marc Cherry, who is also gay, put the neighbors in the show for the specific purpose, he told me, of making “it’s own political statement which was ‘see, you can have gay neighbors, they can be perfectly fine, they can fit in with the rest of the folks, and it doesn’t change anything. And you kind of hope that you are preparing the way, planting little seeds in the minds of people who sometime over the next few years are going to have gay neighbors buy a house on their street. And for me, that’s the most effective political message is that its not particularly aggressive.” It’s not that tolerance for gays and lesbians is a bad message – precisely the opposite. But Hollywood’s goal in making homosexuality ubiquitous on television is to create a gay friend and neighbor for everyone, so that they can then make the most effective argument on behalf of gay marriage.
Even the 2% is untrue, higher than the real number, esp for males
B. Shapiro made a very good observation of the method by which the mass media corrupts the moral values of the viewers, re-shaping them into the media own liberast image.
However it was the Soviet ideologues who introduced the so called method of the "Socialist realism" in the Soviet art – to counter the "unspecified" as though "objective" (i.e. "bourgeois") realism, which "does not exist". The artists should show the "reality" as it MUST be according to the socialist goals (rather than it actually was). They did it by introducing sympathetic characters playing the socialist script, and tabooing any discussion, which those script could not withstand indeed.
To combat the "homosexual realism" of the mass media, we must break the taboos and enforce the discussions which the homosexual script too cannot withstand:
http://www.resonoelusono.com/Prop8TalkPoints.htm
After all, homosexuality deserves no more "awe" than coprophilia.
Another interesting aspect of the article is that it reports in fact about fulfillment of Items 25, 26 of the "Progressive Agenda Plan" from "The Naked Communist":
http://taii.soft-vision.com/index.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Communist
This reminds me of an episode of one of the crime dramas, perhaps "Law & Order". Their investigation took them to a CEO. (a typical suspect) As it turns out, the CEO was an out-of-the-closet homosexual. I knew instantly that he didn't commit the crime they were investigating.
There are numerous such anecdotes.
I once emailed the producers of "Law & Order" suggesting that once, just once, the murderer be a handicapped, black Lesbian social worker with an Hispanic surname who did volunteer work for environmental groups.
I didn't get a reply.
I remember an episode of Law & Order SVU wherein a lesbian used to sleep naked with her young "stepdaughter". We were supposed to believe that nothing sexual happened, since she was such a brave lesbian. However, if a straight, white male had slept with a child, he would be pervert, someone who should burn in hell.
I, too, emailed the show without a reply. I never watched another episode of that slop, either.
i did not like SVU, too emotional and voyeuristic. my wife liked it but i found the deviancy horrific. as i think about it, i would describe it as sitting in the 'horror genre', like 'silence of the lambs'.
i did like the regular law and order.
that would have been fun. a true 'surprise'.
TV was supposed to be an educational tool. Unfortunately, these people have found an accepted method to teach upside down values or lack thereof. Our children are being educated by people with less than stellar morals, values or spiritual or even higher learning content. So much of TV is focused on the "back and lower 40" as we call it in the South. They can't reach the higher elevations because they are too consummed with what's below the belt. Read a book, use the imagination you were given, try being subtle. Get your mind and actions on higher things instead of attempting to have us believe what is WRONG is OK. It isn't, it's perverted and sick. It produces absolutely nothing except sex. Go to a Gay Rights parade and see if this is what you would encourage your children to grow up to be with the transvestites, etc. You're being told a lie. This behavior is not all right, according to the Word of G-d and civilized behavior.
This behavior is an abomination, period!
The author doesn't list the elimination of racial discrimination as one of TV's accomplishments, so its power is not unlimited.
BTW, where did this "FATE accompli" business come from? It is supposed to be FAIT [pronounced "fay"] accompli, which is French for "done deal".
"elimination of racial discrimination". They did that? Wow, now I can rest easy when I am atacked by some black flash mob.
The United States was conceived in liberty. Same-sex marriage is a realization of that dream.
Leviticus 20:13 commands us to kill homosexuals. Nowadays, religious people never cite that embarrassing verse; instead they refer to Leviticus 18:22, which simply calls homosexuality an abomination, a vague term. In any event, the Bible is wrong. There is nothing evil about homosexuality. Whether or not it is common, it is there. Tchaikovsky, Michelangelo, Thomas Mann, Leonard Bernstein, and other people with God-given talents were homosexuals. Homosexuality is part of the glorious variety of the Creation.
Religious people never cite that verse not because it is embarrassing. There is nothing embarrassing in the Bible. The Bible teaches what is good and evil, and it teaches that the evil must be punished. Homosexuality is abomination, and its promotion is a crime which MUST be punished.
Anaesthesia was invented only in 19th century. Before that, terrible sufferings were the reality of daily life for all people: good, and bad, rich, and poor. Thus only after advancement of Anaesthesia soft punishments replaced cruel punishments (and also softened too many minds).
So do you feel that you should be killed for eating shellfish? Or lying, Mr. Law of Nations?
"Thus only after advancement of Anaesthesia soft punishments replaced cruel punishments (and also softened too many minds)."
Hmmm…I remember something before that outlawing "cruel and unusual punishment." What was it? Was it an obscure Swiss philosophy book that the Founders never mentioned? Nah…
Anesthesia was opposed by Baptists and Methodists in the 19th century because of the Bible verse "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children". If women didn't suffer the horrible pain of childbirth they were defying the will of God.
In every century there is a Bible verse or two that is used to cause pain. When it becomes too obvious that the Bible is wrong the verse becomes redefined to seem less ignorant and vicious.
The Bible is not embarrassing, it is simply wrong.
Mr. Reason_For_Life,
I am not well equipped to be a defender of the Bible, so more that I came to God through the science rather than the Bible. Indeed, you could bring even more examples demonstrating the ugliness of the human history in general, and of the religious leaders in particular.
As I wrote here
http://www.resonoelusono.com/ApostasyOfJewry.htm
I too do not know why the good Lord has not yet decided to reveal an updated version of His commandments to humanity. Yet if I do not understand a few things in the Bible, I know that it is me who DOES NOT understand some things, rather than to claim that "it is simply wrong"! Such geniuses like R. Descartes, B. Pascal, I. Newton, J. Kepler, and L. Pasteur would strongly disagree with you (while the Soviet agitprop and every last "modern university" would issue you a diploma cum laude).
And last but not least. If you reject the Bible (which has always been a foundation of the Civilization and the ultimate reference on what is Good and Evil (and abomination): what do you regard as an unshakable axiomatic for the humanity?
"Such geniuses like R. Descartes, B. Pascal, I. Newton, J. Kepler, and L. Pasteur would strongly disagree with you (while the Soviet agitprop and every last "modern university" would issue you a diploma cum laude)."
So, unable to answer me you simply cite authority and call me a communist.
Why am I not surprised?
The Old Testament is wrong about most things no matter who says differently. It is the product of barbarians who proudly proclaim the genocides that they committed in the name of their god. Its depraved "morality" of tribal slaughters is suitable perhaps for nomadic desert marauders but hardly for a civilized society.
The New Testament, though far less barbaric, is primarily a series of increasingly wilder and weirder tales of a man who was, in all likelihood, a decent and honorable teacher. No doubt he would be horrified to see what has been done in his name.
i don't have a list of 'famous gay males', but you are at least wrong on michelangelo.
there are actually many famous and accomplished gay males in history. you don't have to make up and invent any.
You're taking a verse out of context. GOD was establishing the Mosaic law for the Jews. He was to be their king. He laid down His commands for His people for all time. All other peoples & governments who thot they were smarter than & nicer than GOD went their own way. The way of all the earth. But whether or not you choose to believe, is a personal decision, but the Word (ie the Bible) is not wrong, you are. Just because nice talented people sin, does not negate the act of sin, it just shows the sinfulness of rebellion
Homosexuality is not part of the glorious variety of Creation, anymore than other forms of mental illness, like schizophrenia and bipolar illness. It is a derangement, probably due to overpopulation, a means of population control.
Same-sex marriage is not a realization of an American dream but an attack on real marriage. Any adults can live together, with or without sexual relations, share money, etc. It was instituted by a judge who overstepped the boundaries of judging. Do you think that there should be any laws regulating marriage? Do you think that incest and polygamy are also part of the glorious variety of Creation?
Homosexuality is part of the glorious variety of the Creation. Oh come now, the favorite line of activists has always been "I was born that way" and it works fine at liberal cocktail parties, talk shows, andis justified in the fringes of pseudo-science not real science. Homosexuality is acquired behavior both psycologically and physically. There is nothing wrong with homosexuals having legal civil unions but don't pervert the union of marriage as a man and a woman which has been in every culture for thousands and there is no reason to allow legal homosexual unions to termed legally as a marriage. The civil union contract can be designed to accomplish all the legalities of a marriage.
Homosexuality is part of the Creation, but not glorious at all, just as other maladies. People are not supposed to boast with their maladies displaying them as though a feat and demanding the social approval for it. Society does not owe any recognition of such "feats". No "social unions". As it is commented below: RENT A ROOM. And that's it.
There is nothing natural about homosexuality. Species evolve to survive, and survival demands reproduction, a contribution to the gene pool. Homosexuals do neither of those things. We didn't spend billions of years evolving to declare homosexual relationships equal to or superior to reproductive relationships. Homosexuality is evolutions way of taking weak genetic material out of the gene pool to see that it doesn't get passed onto the next generation. That's all.
a comedian. silly posting.
'natural selection' of this nature is the province of the
left and its eugenics history.
Homosexuality is natural but not normal. Homosexuality is the result of incorrectly wired brain , just like any other brain disorder. The difference is that many
brain disorders is linked to physical disorder. and homosexuality doesn't .
Species do indeed evolve to survive. Since homosexuality has no genetic purpose, its existence is a miracle. Let us appreciate this purposeless miracle.
Animals too can be homosexual. One of my granddogs (my grandson's dogs) is a homosexual.
Homosexuality is no greater "miracle" than coprophilia.
But true homosexuality is not found in any animals in a natural environment, only in rare instances in artificial situations (e.g. domestication, zoos)
What Shapiro doesn't focus on is the fact that gays are a powerful lobby. They intimidate heterosexual TV producers into creating gay-friendly scripts. The problem lies less with "Hollywood" (an all-purpose bogeyman) as with the pressure groups that see the TV networks as flags to be captured. The networks should grow a pair and tell the homos to start their own network.
Excellent point….radicals in any population can by "pressure" drive an agenda or PR effort.
The continued "mainstreaming" of sexual deviancy is TYPICAL leftwing behavior.
Sexual orientation is IRRELEVANT.
It is NOT something that needs to be taught at ALL out side of health class if then.
We DO not point out if some one is HETEROSEXUAL.
WHY is it that sexual deviants have to rub every one face in it?
Do you see parades of heterosexuals SCREAMING about how great they are, and let me at your daughter or wife?
NO.
GET A ROOM.
DON"T tell DON'T ask.
And Public Displays' of Affection by Hetro's is JUST as bad as by homo's.
G E T a R O O M.
I do NOT want to know about it. PERIOD.
Wether you "got any" and who or what you "got any" with as long as it is between consenting ADULTS is not any of my business.
STOP trying to make it my business.
It doesn't belong in school books. At least not until collage age if then.
That is why we left you alone before you "came out of the closet".
What?
Did you REALLY think that no one knew about Bachelor Uncle bob in his fifties who has never married? The same for Ant Betsy.
PLEEEAASSEE.
You want special privileges. Sorry Not happening.
Thank you! You've nailed it!
Shapiro – Are you seriously suggesting that the media are being used for propaganda? I'm shocked!
I hate it as much as anyone when entertainment media are corrupted by blatant propaganda but the solution to that is to stop watching. I stopped watching "Law and Order" precisely for that reason even though I was, and still am, in love with Angie Harmon.
But propaganda is ubiquitous on TV. One of my favorite shows, "NCIS", is filled with Constitution trashing agents who take for granted that to do their job they must engage in warrant less searches. Yet, despite their illegal power they are never corrupted by it. Talk about fantasy!
The one thing that I have learned about TV gay people. They are every bit as stupid and boring as their heterosexual counterparts. Gosh! I'm shocked again.
Even if homosexuality were in one's DNA (which is not yet scientifically established), it is a malady as much as infertility. You would do good if you help a person to seek cure rather than persist in (much less boast) with his malady.
There are people who recovered of their sexual deviations, created normal families, and try to spread the word about it. And there exist religious organizations and doctors who help. They all are ostracized and silenced by homosexual Mafia.
This is the template from the "far left extremists" wether the issue is gay marriage,
gun control, porn, abortion, fill in the blank…………..attack those in the majority, the
normals (there are such animals), tear down and take away their freedoms so the
pervs can have theirs, alll with the "objective" media's support.
Their "changing minds" is to make it law, so they can force their immorality down
our throats! Thats their definition of "tolerance", and we all know they practice what
they preach-ha ha!!! Oh, but their not "judgmental" are they now? And their so
loving, caring, and sensitive now–aren't they? The kind of compassion that Kills!
Jump on board, and we'll all have a 'glee-full time'….
keep bending over, but don't "blame" society or seek sympathy
for the diseases you caused!
grim reaper
You are right on the money! In fact you are writing about already fulfilled Items 25, 26 of the Progressive Agenda Plan:
http://taii.soft-vision.com/index.php
We will continue to have problems with homosexuals until we find a cure. But you need to admire the Left for having the money, organization and commitment to "normalize" something so obviously and self evidently a pathological syndrome/behavioral disorder. An extraordinary political achievement.
Yes! But first, those who are sick at least must acknowledge that they are sick and wish to recover rather than to boast with their sickness.
There are people who recovered of their sexual deviations, created normal families, and try to spread the word about it. And there exist religious organizations and doctors who help. They all are ostracized and silenced by homosexual Mafia.
In my opinion,homosexuality is a private matter to be talked about only among that person's family and friends,except in very limited and extraordinary circumstances. I don't really want to know who someone sleeps with.
Homosexuality clearly is an obsessive-complusive psychologic disorder similar to alcoholics, gamblers, kleptomaniacs, etc. They all need treatment, not glorification!
Exactly!
I agree. I work in the mental health field and I have found homosexuals to be obsev-conpulsive. They take too much drugs food and booze. I feel the same sex activities is because it is easier to get laid.
Once they stable out of the o/c behavior tey then to stop the homosexual behavior.
Just once person's observations.
Why do people oppose gay marriage? Because they are afraid of their own desires. If gays marry, and if homosexuality becomes ever more open and acceptable, people with desires they are trying to suppress will be more tempted than ever to give into their secret urges. They will become gay, and all the world will know it.
I think it has more to do with the biologically based revulsion and disgust that homosexuality and by association homosexuals triggers in most normal people. Homosexuality makes most normal people sick, as homos are well aware by their "kiss ins" to assault their normal enemies. I think people are also outraged that this self evident and obvious pathology is mainstreamed in our society in spite of resistence by the vast majority of normal people. Perhaps we can all agree that we should commit our time and money to find a cure to reduce a signficant amount of personal and family pain.
Can you possibly get any more delusional than this?
So, a chosen amoral, hedonistic behavior is now repackaged by the homosexual lobby with the help of their fellow travelers in the MSM into a benign civil right. And, with the help of the gullible, morally void social masses, homosexuality will be elevated to a acceptable, righteous social behavior.
It would do well to remember that it was because of homosexuality and its irresponsible, reckless sexual behavior that AIDS became a world-wide epidemic, and that because homosexuals have not changed their attitudes or behavior, the AIDS virus is mutating to more resilient strains.
Every civilization or society throughout history that embraced or condoned homosexuality witnessed this behavior as a prelude to its own moral corruption and eventual downfall, so will be the inevitable outcome here.
All this is so very true, and Mr. Shapiro was right on the money as to the reason that the idea of gay marriage is now quite accepted by many people. In New York it is already law. Yes, after tremendous pressure from gay advocates and the Democratic governor, even the Republicans were intimidated and added their vote to make gay marriage legal in New York. From call-ins it seamed to me that it was perhaps slightly against. But no one really asks the people. There should have been a referendum on this. But as the old saying goes: "The squeaky wheel gets the oil."
The Devil is in the details and the details are from the Devil, man's fall
brought about all sin or if you will aberrtions in behavior which undermine
societal norms. Gays go nuts with religious or Biblical arguments against
their conduct. The majority of Americans understand the prohibitions from
Church and family education. That gays do not reproduce they need your
children to continue what has been described as psychotic disorder.
The correct Christian position is to love the sinner not the sin and try to
bring the errant person into a correct relationship with God and community.
As this is not happening on the fast track and gays continue to have help
pushing their agenda I wonder why and see the answer in the weakening
of the men of America to the help of our enemies. It is a difficult problem
if you see it that way, maybe not seeing is helpful but the gay will not let
that happen, all in all it is just a pain in the butt, repent and quit with the
emotional crap, grow up and know we understand not everyone can be
helped or wants help…………………………………………….William
Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and many other people mentioned in the Bible had several wives. As for the New Testament, Jesus ended divorce. He also said
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time,
Thou shalt not commit adultery: but I say unto you,
That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her
hath committed adultery already with her in his heart.
And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and
cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that
one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole
body should be cast into hell (Matthew 5:27-29).
But he didn't have a syllable to say about ending polygamy.
The good news of Jesus Christ is that he took on our sin debt, the Gospels
tell it all and considering the amount of sinners repentant of their sins and
following Christ as is outlined in the Bible, He took the faithful's sin debt
on Himself at the Cross, salvation in His blood and death, atonement,
reconciliation, reunited with God in good standing forever. Those who
reject His substitution for their demerit should take their future loss
seriously…………….Now talking about loosers, more than one wife, I can
not imagine that and Jesus knew it would die out, like who wants that
much pain but I am sure He will accept into the Kingdom repentant
polygamists……….There is a way out of sinfulness, we are all stuck in
fallen bodies and work out our lives, the homesexual is no more lost
than all others who are committing sin, there is and answer for sin
at it is found at the Cross of Christ……….Have a good day…William
There is an agenda to promote the gay lifestyle as acceptable and 'normal' to the western peoples. One can not and should not replace a heterosexual society, which has been very successful and prosperous, with a homosexual society. It is a path of error and destruction.
A homosexual society can not build a community or a nation. It is a stagnate and corrupted version of the life giving process. It demeans the growth of peoples and nations. It is, by its very nature, an abomination to a healthy society and will eventually promote the backwardness and ignorance of those peoples.
I do not buy the snake oil that I, as a heterosexual, was not able to choose my sexual identity. That is an outright lie and pure propaganda. Of course I can and do choose my sexual orientation. I am quite able to change my choice and day of the week. Just like the gays can and do choose their orientation.
And this is just one of the many falsehoods that are used to promote an agenda that will lead to the destruction of any society that adopts it. The Afghan society is a prime example of what can happen to a people on the wrong path.
Isn't government telling people who they can or can't get married to just another form of "big government" intervening in people's lives?
Make up your minds already. You only want government staying out of the "market" but when it comes to ruling over people's choices: who to love, who to marry, where to live, what to consume, whether to have an unwanted pregnancy or not, you seem very eager to get government to enforce your "values".
Your comment about the "choice" factor on "unwanted pregnancy" is quite amusing. The fact that a human life is murdered in the process matters nothing to you, and the fact that the said murder of a human life means the person who got themselves into that "unwanted pregnancy" in the first place is free to duck responsibility for the consequences of their own actions, is also supposed to be irrelevant. The notion that abortion is about "choice" is another typical left wing lie, when it's ultimately all about trying to glorify the perverted values of the Sexual Revolution by finding a quick and convenient way to escape any of the responsibilities associated with it.
I also share a genetic susceptibility to colon cancer with my sister, who died of it. There was nothing glorious or good about that.
My condolences for your loss.
Please understand me; I have real trouble reconciling a 'good' deity who has created suffering of this nature. My 'spiritual leader' talks to me about this but I am not sure I have engaged the matter with adequate seriousness. I often just sit here and stew; helping no one.
The smell is evil the act is evil and makes nothing but a sad life
What they go through can be compared to what alcoholics and drug addicts go through. But we don't glamorize their aberrant behaviour the way we do with homosexuals.
Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a deathstyle. Homosexuals should be treated with compassion and given help to overcome their sickness just as alcoholics and drug addicts.
How many gay or lesbian people do you know?
"deathstyle"… someone;s been listening to crappy later-era Metallica.
TV is the Orwell medium…..it is the perfect apparatus for indoctrinating couch potatoes.
In Leviticus chapter 11, God established dietary laws for the nation of Israel, including a prohibition against eating shellfish. This prohibition was never applicable to other nations. Daniel knew that he and his fellow Hebrews would be defiled by eating the food provided by Nebuchadnezzar, and so they did not eat it – but we never read that they condemned any persons of other nationalities for eating it.
When we read, however, of a specific set of sexual sins in Leviticus chapters 18 and 20, we find that not only were they prohibited to Israel, but they were also prohibited to other nations as well. These sins included incest, homosexuality, and bestiality. The land itself rejected such sins by the inhabitants who practiced them.
These other nations were not enjoined to administer the death penalty for such sexual sins, as was ancient Israel, but the sins were still repugnant.
So, we Gentiles in the modern United States may eat shellfish without immediate punishment, and suffer the health damage that accrues from the eating. We may also commit acts of homsexuality and bestiality and not be stoned, but suffer the damage to the soul that accrues from such acts. People who commit such acts should be treated with kindness and compassion. The acts themselves, however, will always be wrong.
TV is just following the example set by its romanticization of Blacks beginning in the late 60s. Blacks are portrayed as highly intelligent, supremely wise, self-controlled, tolerant and heroic. Whites, particularly White males are invariably set up as fools, bigots, cowards and incompetents.
Now this is even funnier. Opposition to murder and senseless slaughter (which is what the overwhelming majoriy of abortions are based on, the fraud convenience meaasure, or sex selection, or trying tio cover-up a transgression that could get them into hot water) should be rooted only in terms of whether or not one is in favor of how much the state should provide for the individual! Put another way, I might as well let you shoot my next door neighbor and call that a just form of population control because I don't favor having the government takeover of health care!
The moral bankruptcy of the pro-abortion position reveals itself once again,.
sorry epaddon, you're not making any sense.
Mere homosexuality in and of itself is not a threat to society. Homosexuality, as such, is not an identity but an activity. However, the gay subculture has been pushing the notion that being "gay" is an identity or an ethnicity akin to being Irish, Black, Mexican, Greek, etc. The initial aims of the gay liberation movement in the late 60s/early 70s were noble in regard to the decriminalization of sex acts between two consenting adults of the same gender. This was a right to privacy issue and should still be seen that way. Now the gay subculture wants universal acceptance of homosexuality through media saturation and the redefinition of marriage. This is part and parcel of the cultural marxist script that Hollywood is portraying.