Monday, April 30, 2012

Project 1 Revision

Demetra Drayton
Professor Mellisa Tetterton
English 1200
Final
30 April 2012

Homosexual Parents
The author of The Top Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Should be Illegal satirically lists 10 reasons why gay people should not be allowed to marry. It seems as though the author is writing about repealing Proposition 8, a law in the California constitution which states that same sex couples cannot marry. The author is sarcastic in all of the reasons gay people should not be allowed to marry. The author questions the reasons gay marriage is illegal. Number seven of the reasons in his listings is “obviously gay parents raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.” Belmont’s reasoning for this line is to persuade people that gay parents do raise straight children, just as some straight parents raise gay children. Belmont’s audience consists of those who are opposed to gay marriage. The title of his article is meant to grasp the attention of those opposed to gay marriage, because it comes across as an anti-gay article. He is trying to convince them that gay people should have the same marital rights as straight people. The number seven listing is meant to open people’s eyes to the fact that gay couples do in face raise straight children and do not influence their children to be gay. Gay parents are just the same as straight parents when it comes to parenting. Belmont is biased in his argument that gay couples should be allowed the same marital and parental rights as straight couples; by the way he uses sarcasm to say that gay couples shouldn’t have the same rights as straight couples. Belmont’s listings are accurate because gay people are just the same as straight people, other than the fact that they are physically attracted to the same sex. Sarcasm is the best way to show Belmont’s ethos; it lets his audiences know that he knows both sides of his argument and he uses sarcasm to make each point in his listing seem ridiculous. Belmont is stating that the government is being unfair and judgmental towards homosexuals. Homosexuality has been one of the most controversial topics in the United States since the 1950’s. When psychologist performed tests on homosexuals, homosexuality was said to be a sickness and contagious. Although homosexuality has been proven not to be a disease, many people still consider it to be wrong and do not encourage homosexuals to parent children. According to an article by Paul Cameron, “homosexuality is contagious.” This suggests that anyone who comes in contact with a homosexual will contract homosexuality. This would make it more dangerous for children of homosexual parents, because children are more susceptible to illness and influence. Cameron’s ideas deduce that such children will automatically be homosexual. Conversely, an article by Mackenzie Carpenter shows that homosexual parents do not influence or encourage their children to be homosexual. My personal experience also indicates that growing up in a homosexual home in no way encourages an individual to become gay:
The sexual development of children of gay and lesbian parents is interesting for both scientific and social reasons. The present study is the largest to date to focus on the sexual orientation of adult sons of gay men.  From advertisements in gay publications, 55 gay or bisexual men were recruited who reported on 82 sons at least 17 years of age.  More than 90% of sons whose homosexual orientation could be rated were heterosexual.  Furthermore, Gay and heterosexual sons did not differ on potentially relevant variables such as the length of time they had lived with their fathers. Results suggest that any environmental influence of gay fathers on their sons' sexual orientation is not large (Vogel 5).  
This survey says that gay parents have no real influence on their son's sexual orientation. Along with getting married, openly gay and lesbian parents are starting families. This is a concern for some because the common opinion on homosexuality “holds that, like drug use, homosexuality is a learned pathology passed from generation to generation by molding and seduction” (Cameron 2). Homosexuality cannot be compared to drug use because drug use can cause addiction and harm to one’s body, whereas homosexuality is simply the physical and emotional attraction to someone of the same sex. A countless amounts of misnomers wrong claims about homosexuality have been found to have occurred throughout history. It wasn’t until 1973 that homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Doctors believe that mental illness can be passed onto their offspring. So, it is theorized that children of homosexual parents are more likely to become homosexuals themselves as adults because they are exposed to it on a daily basis. Children are mimetic, so it stands to reason that by being exposed to homosexuality regularly they are more inclined to become homosexual themselves. However, most homosexual adults are raised by heterosexual parents (Vogel 8). This makes it seems as though people who disagree with homosexuality will accept any reason as to why homosexuality is wrong and why it has such a strong, negative influence on children. Contagion was not the only leading theory against homosexual parenting but also sexual abuse of children.  Cameron believed, “It is vain to blind oneself to the fact that the problem of male homosexuality is in essence the problem of the corruption of youth by itself and by its elders” (Cameron 3). There is also skepticism that homosexual parents are more likely to sexually abuse their children than heterosexual parents.   “there is no evidence either that homosexual parents are more likely to seduce or allow their children to be seduced than their heterosexual counterparts or that lesbian mothers or their acquaintances molest children more often than heterosexual individuals” (Cameron 3) Homosexuals do not commit or allow sexual harm to be done to their children, nor do they purposely corrupt our youth. Most parents raise their children the way their parents raised them; this has nothing to do with sexual preference, because heterosexual people raise homosexual people.
Being raised in a home with lesbian parents is just the same as being raised in a home with heterosexual parents. Living with my mom and her husband for 9 years of my life was mostly the same as living with my lesbian parents, in which I have been with for 10 years now. My homosexual parents have not in any way encouraged me to be gay, if anything, it is the opposite because they do not want me to face as many hardships as they face. My parents raised me to be just like any other “normal” teenager raised by heterosexual parents, only I seem to be more open minded about things than my friends who were raised my their heterosexual parents. Some would say that my experience is not “typical” of a child growing up in a homosexual household. One man who would disagree with my actual knowledge of being raised by homosexuals is Paul Cameron. According to Paul Cameron I should have caught “the gay.”
Dr. Paul Cameron, a known homophobic, believes that homosexuality is contagious and that our youth must be protected from it.  He states, "Homosexuality is an infectious appetite with personal and social consequences. It is like the dog that gets a taste for blood after killing its first victim and desires to get more victims thereafter with a ravenous hunger” (“Paul Cameron” 6).  Cameron compares homosexuality to a blood-thirsty animal that has a desire to harm and kill other animals. He likens homosexuality to the predatory nature of a wild animal.  Many anti-gay people use Cameron’s research to argue that homosexuality is wrong and homosexuals should not be allowed to parent children. His research is used on many anti-gay sites although he is not a credible source.  Dr. A Nicholos Groth commented on Cameron’s crude distortion of Groth’s findings regarding homosexuals and children.
(Cameron) misrepresents my findings and distorts them to advance his homophobic views. I make a very clear distinction in my writing between pedophilia and homosexuality, noting that adult males who sexually victimize young boys are either pedophilic or homosexual, and that in my research I have not found homosexual men turning away from adult partners to children… I consider this totally unprofessional behavior on the part of Dr. Cameron and I want to bring this to your attention. He disgraces his profession (Tsunami 7).
Dr. Goth clearly states that Cameron misrepresents his work regarding homosexuals and pedophilic behavior towards children; there has been no found information to support Cameron’s belief of homosexual encouraging deviant sexual behavior with children.  The American Sociological Association also says that Cameron has misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality and lesbianism. Paul Cameron’s ethos was diminished when the American Psychological Association expelled him for non cooperation with the ethics committee, when he wrote papers associating homosexuality with perpetration of child abuse and reduced life expectancy. The American Sociological Association as well as the American Psychological Association accused Cameron of misrepresenting social science research (Tsunami 7). Cameron also delivered a speech stating that a four-year-old boy suffered a brutal homosexual attack in a mall, but police were not able to confirm Cameron’s accusation, and finally Cameron confessed that it was a rumor he had heard. Not only is Cameron not a reliable source because of his countless amounts of false accusations and papers, but he is also described by Tsunami and Dr. Goth as being a homophobic. Cameron is incapable of making a clear and accurate case about homosexuals because he is only willing to look at things through his skewed perspective.
According to an article by Mackenzie Carpenter, in which he interviewed two children of homosexual parents, homosexual parents do not influence their children to be gay. Terrance McGeorge is a 20 year old African American male who is the son of a gay man. Terrance is gay, and says that he started getting crushes on boys when he was around three or four years old. Many people may think that Terrance’s being gay is a result of his father being gay, but, in fact, according to Terrance, his father did not come out to him until he was six years old. Terrance’s father never encouraged his son to be gay; it was simply a coincidence. Just as heterosexual parents whose children are gay is a coincidence; most people would not suggest that heterosexual parents influenced their children towards a gay life. According to Paul Cameron and others who argue that homosexual parents influence their children to be gay, heterosexual parents should not have homosexual children because parents influence their children to be the same as them. Carpenter’s second interview was with Rebecca Meiksin, a 22 year old female who is the daughter of a lesbian. Rebecca is heterosexual and always has been. Rebecca says that her mother never told her that she was gay, but she knew at a young age because her mother’s friends always had same sex significant others and she always attended gay rights events. Rebecca’s mother never encouraged her to be with women, and her mother was not, in any way, a man hater. Rebecca’s mother allowed male influences on Rebecca’s life; she even had a pretend father who was also gay (Carpenter 5). Rebecca is a prime example that a heterosexual child can be raised by a homosexual and not be influenced to be gay. In support of this argument, the court case Bottom v. Bottom in November 1993, the American Psychological Association states that “the belief that a child raised in a household with a lesbian or gay parent is more apt to be lesbian or gay is without any basis in fact” (Cameron 2). This case proves that homosexual parents do not breed homosexual children. Paul Cameron asks in his article about homosexual parents “is research so rigorous and compelling, that it enables a prudent person or professional association to completely disregard common or traditional opinion?” (Cameron 2). This is why Cameron is not a credible source on gay parenting; he is not concerned with the facts, but with “the common or traditional opinion.” While Cameron’s argument is based on social fears, Carpenter’s argument is based on facts. What makes Carpenter a credible source, is that both her interviews were with children of gay parents, one being homosexual and the other being heterosexual. Carpenter also has not made any false claims in her research.
There are also many positive celebrity influences on homosexual parenting as well. I’m sure that Neil Patrick Harris, one of the most respected men on television and Broadway, and his partner David Burtka are not encouraging or influencing their children to be gay. Like many parents, they want to provide a loving environment in which they can grow to feel confident to be and express themselves freely.  If anything, parents should be supportive of whatever sexual preference their children have and concern themselves more with their children’s happiness. In my own experience I have learned that straight parents try harder to influence their children to be straight than homosexual parents influence their children’s sexual preferences at all. Heterosexual and homosexual parents raise both homosexual and heterosexual children
Belmont’s Top Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Should be Illegal number seven “obviously gay parents raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children,” is the perfect example of why gay parents do raise straight children, through his sarcasm he shows how ridiculous that statement really is. 






Works Cited
 Belmont, Barry. "Top Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Should Be Illegal." UNR Students for Liberty. 9 June 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://unrforliberty.com/2010/06/top-ten-reasons-gay-marriage-should-be-illegal.html>.
 Bobrow, David, Marilyn Wolfe, Sarah Mikach, and J. Michael Bailey. "Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers." Developmental Psychology. By Judith Harris. 1st ed. Vol. 31. 1931.
 Cameron, Paul, and Kirk Cameron. "Adolescence." Homosexual Parents 31 (1996). Print.
Cameron, Paul. "Children Of Homosexuals And Transsexuals More Apt To Be Homosexual." Cambridge Journals (2005). 
Carpenter, Mackenzie. "What Happens to Kids Raised by Gay Parents?" Post-Gazette.com. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9 June 2007. Web. 5 Feb. 2012. <http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07161/793042-51.stm>.
 "Paul Cameron." Southern Poverty Law Center. Southern Poverty Law Firm, 2 Feb. 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/paul-cameron>.
Tsunami, Black. "Homophobic 'researcher' Paul Cameron in All of His Repulsive Glory." Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters. 20 July 2009. Web. <http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/07/homophobic-researcher-paul-cameron-in.html>.
 Vogel, David L., Stephanie Madon, and Stephen R. Wester. "Mental Health Stereotypes About Gay Men." Sex Roles A Journal of Research. By Guy A. Boysen. 1-2 ed. Vol. 54.  

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Donald Duck says the N-word/Dresses as a Nazi


I have posted a video above of a clip from Who Framed Roger Rabbit, a Disney classic in which characters from different Disney shows and movies finally get to interact. This was a fun movie for people because a lot of their favorite characters were in one movie, it is an action filled detective story and of course that inevitable love story, but that is not the main point here! The main point is one of Disney’s most famous characters is wearing a Nazi uniform and saying the N-Word.
Donald has always been a very fiery character; his random outburst of anger is what makes the audience laugh. But how far is too far? When a Disney character starts saying derogatory words, that’s usually a sign that it’s gone too far. This kind of language and behavior from Donald Duck is encouraging racism and violence with the swastika and N-Word displayed. What Disney is saying by doing this sort of thing is, “It’s no big deal to be mean to people and say offensive words,” and it’s not. Children look up to and follow Disney characters.
When children hear things like what Donald Duck said, it makes them think that it is okay to say that. If you’ve ever been around a toddler you know they REPEAT EVERYTHING. Children mock what they see and hear, especially when it comes to something that they admire and always want to watch i.e. Disney shows. This kind of language can even then be taken to school with the child, and because they think it is alright to say such things, they may use that type of language with their friends and hurt someone’s feelings, or even become suspended. Disney is setting a bad example with the subliminal messages that they put in their movies and shows. It is supposed to be about the children and providing good, influential, PG entertainment.
Disney is suppose to be a teacher and example setter for its audience, but it seems that Disney is not so concerned about the well being of their young audience. If Disney were concerned, there wouldn’t be so many subliminal messages in their material, especially racist and sexual ones. Of course this is not the first time that Disney has used Nazi material in their films, “Wayward Canary,” also had a swastika displayed in it.
This has gone absolutely too far! There is no reason for Disney to still be up and running with all of the horrible things that they have allowed in their films. It’s a definite problem when you can point out more than one racist or sexual thing in films that are geared towards children. This needs to stop, and it is ultimately up to the parents; who are the consumers of Disney products. How can you allow an obviously perverted and racist company to continue to exist without any consequences? Your children are involved, and they learn from what they see, and Disney is showing them how to a hateful person.
Source:
Donald Duck Racist?. Uploaded by radiolocke. July 31, 2007. YouTube.
This 57 second video shows so much about Disney. It displays Donald Duck, a famous Disney character Saying the N-Word and wearing Swastika’s everywhere. This video is extremely racist and it even has the show South Park making fun of it.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Oh How Sexual The Little Mermaid is!

The Little Mermaid is a classic Disney tale about a young Mermaid names Ariel. Ariel defies her father King Triton and goes to the top of the water to see humans; she discovers Prince Eric who becomes her love interest and eventually they live happily ever after.
Beautiful right?
Well what some people don't know is that there are some very vividly sexual things in The Little Mermaid. The original Little Mermaid, yes the VHS for those of you who were born after 1997, has been some very a penis on the box. The penis on The Little Mermaid box is apart of King Triton's castle, and is very noticeable.

So again Disney is "slips" up. This absolutely on purpose, because there is no way for a company that is so precise in everything that they do to keep having accidental sexual messages in their works. Disney World workers attend a 9am-5pm course for several days before starting work and there is a book of what everyone should look like in order to male the guest feel comfortable. It is so bold for the Disney animators to put a penis on the COVER of the movie, and it's in a way disrespectful, because when people think of movies to take their children to see they think Disney, because of the great stories and the quality of the movies and shows.

Saying that this type of "carelessness" is going to be Disney's downfall is impossible because has been going strong for a really longtime, and they show no sign of slowing down.

Because Disney is not being punished for such crude behavior; they can continue to put sexual messages in their movies for what ever reason they do.
What does this say about the parents? (that's a whole other subject) My point is Disney is still being supported even after its' continuous "lack of observation."
Unfortunately the penis on the cover is not the only sexual innuendo in The Little Mermaid. In the scene when Ariel (secretly Ursala) and Prince Eric are about to get married the priest has a boner. Apparently some say that this is the Priests knee, but it is so obvious that the priest has a boner on this scene.It is also really disgusting and perverted to put this in a children's film. Even of it is a knee; the fact that it can so easily be mistaken for an erection is so distasteful on Disney's part.

Sources:

Porowski, Mike. Hidden Sexual Messages Found in Disney Movie. Lucky 13.
This source is about how Disney purposefully put a naked image of a woman in the film The Rescuers, and the source a lot of ethos because of all of its supported facts.

Oberdorf, Janna."The Secret behind the Magic of Disney". NYU Livewire
This article explains the different requirements to work st Disney. It talks about Disney's look and the training you have to go through to work there.

Nazi Hyenas from the Lion King


The Lion King is arguably one of the most famous Disney movies ever! The Lion King is about a prince cub named Simba. Mufasa, Simba's father tells him that when he dies his son Simba must take over the thrown, because it is his duty and he would be the rightful king. Scar, Simba's father kills Mufasa. We learn that Scar is going to kill his brother Mufasa in his big song "Be Prepared." This is a song about Mufasa dying, and Scar becoming the King over Pride Rock. In this scene Scars companions are not Lions, but Hyenas, which are known for being very aggressive animals. The Hyenas are at the bottom of the cave, not marching, but goose-stepping! For those of you who do not know what goose-stepping is; it is a march that Nazi soldiers were known for.
A Nazi is the member of the National Socialist German Workers Party; they were under the rule of Hitler. Remember him? Yea that’s the jerk that was responsible for killing of 6,000,000 Jews (1.5 Million of them being Children). Disney put Hyenas goose-stepping in their most famous Disney movie. There is also a line in this scene where Scar says “Stick with me and you’ll never go hungry again,” this is seriously the same way Hitler came to power! He promised the German people, who were suffering after WWI, that they would have better lives if they brought him to power. Honestly you have to be blind to not see the similarities.
It was rumored that Walt Disney, himself was a fascist, and he was even called upon the House of Unamerican Activities Party, but only as a witness. Although it was never actually proven true that Disney was a fascist, it is still very arguable. Goose-Stepping is not the only thing that Disney has done to make people think that a lot of Disney is based on fascist views. In the 1932 version of the “Wayward Canary” there is a lighter with a swastika on it. I have posted the video at the bottom; it is 3:31 into the video.  
Disney is putting Nazi representations in their movies and shows, and so it can definitely be argued that Disney is in fact encouraging Nazism by displaying it to the younger generations. This is absolutely appalling because it symbolizes violence and hate. Disney didn’t even try to hide these subliminal messages, and yet people are still so willing to allow Disney to persuade them that they have the best interest in mind when it comes to their children.

YouTube Video for your enjoyment and hopefully disgust!

“History of the Holocaust-An Introduction”. Jewish Virtual Library. Michigan
This is a website that is specifically dedicated to the history of the Holocaust. It is filled with facts from the time the Holocaust started til the time it ended. The sight is goes along with what you can learn at the Holocaust Museum.  

Janessen, Paul. “Hyena”. Out of Africa. African Wildlife Foundation
This website is specifically dedicated to Hyenas! It gives a lot of different facts about Hyenas and their character traits.

Eutychus. “Was Walt Disney a Fascist”. The Straight Dope Science Advisory Board. 2005

Monday, March 19, 2012

Disney Sells Sex


Sex Sells with Disney

Disney movies have had controversial issues for over 75 years, either intentionally or unintentionally displaying sexual content in their movies. The fact that it has been going on so long definitely displays that sex sells. So for decades Disney has been corrupting the minds of children and influencing teenagers with their movies for years.
The movie that is being reviewed is Disney’s The Rescuers. When this movie came out it was an exciting action filled film that pleased it’s family audience.

Disney's The Rescuers is a cute little movie about mice who rescue a little girl from the evil pawn shop owner Madame Medusa and her side kick Mr. Snoops, but what many people did not expect from this nice Disney movie is the pornographic image in the background. Most subliminal messages in Disney movies are word images and may be questionable, but this is a picture and it is obviously a naked woman! There was nothing accidental about this photo, because it is a real life photo in an animated film. So that means that picture was deliberately chosen to put in this film by whomever. What does that say about Disney? Is publicity that important to them that they are willing to corrupt the minds of their young audiences?

Disney released a statement soon after, saying that the images were not put in by their animators, but by an outside post-production company.
Disney is one of the most powerful production companies in the WORLD! So why would they use outside production companies to finish their work, especially with how exclusive they are. Disney is a very strict company when it comes to their image, many of my friends have worked for Disney, and even the parks maintain a strict code of conduct and appearance. Actors are not allowed to travel outside of their certain areas in while in costume at Disney World and the employees are also not allowed to be seen leaving Disney World, but are required to take underground passage ways.

A company that is this strict and pays so much attention to detail would not let something as vulgar as this slip through the cracks if it wasn’t intentionally done. So why do these “mistakes” keep happening? We don’t exactly know why, but a few guesses are either for publicity or because Disney is filled with perverts!


Porowski, Mike. Hidden Sexual Messages Found in Disney Movie. Lucky 13.
This source is about how Disney purposefully put a naked image of a woman in the film The Rescuers, and the source a lot of ethos because of all of its supported facts.

Saturday, March 3, 2012

Disney gets Dirty!


This wonderful YouTube video was put up by crackerjackcoop. The scenes in this video are from the original Disney movies before they were edited, so if you still have some of your VHS' as I do, KEEP THEM so you can go back and take another look.

Now clearly we can see the messages in these clips. So let's start with The Little Mermaid shall we?

The Little Mermaid:
The priest who is marrying Ursala ( pretending to be Arial btw) has a boner ladies and gentlemen. Now this is wrong on so many levels! I wouldn't particularly call myself a religious person, but PRIEST with a boner?! Come on, not to mention it's a children's film! Personally I don't mind a little hanky panky business going on in my films, but the fact that the animators and editors kept this in the original film is absolutely ridiculous. Some argue that it is just the priest's knee that is poking out, but let's be honest the first thing that came to my mind and probably everyone else's was PENIS! 


Speaking of penis let's move on to the cover of The Little Mermaid. When looking at the cover of The Little Mermaid you see Ariel, Prince Eric, King Triton and Ursala, but wait look a little closer and you'll see that the palace has a phallus! Yes in the background there is a penis. This "mistake" somehow got past the artist and the editors? 


The Lion King:
Arguably one of Disney's best movies The Lion King has a nice little message for it's audience too! When the lead character Simba is faced with deciding whether or not he should go back to Pride Rock, he distressingly plops down into some pollen ( I guess Lions aren't allergic) which rises into the sky. The Pollen, which not many people seem to notice spell out the word sex in the sky. Yes, and just in case you don't think you read the bold letters right here it is again---> The Pollen, which not many people seem to notice spell out the word sex in the sky. Now I know most three year olds know all about sex, but what about the adults, is Disney just not thinking about them?! Another "mistake" that slipped through the cracks. Go editors down at Disney, you really know how to make a PG movie!


Alladin:
Alladin is a great action movie for children and even displays a strong and sassy female lead, Jasmine. However, supposedly it is heard that in the movie when Alladin is giving a speech, genie and the carpet are arguing and the sand monster arrives someone says, "Good Teenagers Take Off Your Clothes." This is a little hard to prove because it is not visual. Some people hear it and some people don't. Go back and see if you can hear it, this is a hard one to argue.


Cited:
Subliminal Messages In Disney Movies. Uploaded by crackerjackchoop. Jan 18, 2008. Youtube.


This video is 3 minutes and 6 seconds long. It shows subliminal messages in the Disney Movies The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, and Alladin.