The Folk Prophet

Separating from entertainment -- has the time fully come

Recommended Posts

My wife pointed out to me last night that she'd read there was a "two moms" scene in Toy Story 4 (I then looked it up and confirmed this was true). I mentioned this to a buddy of mine and we then discussed our frustration at Disney and their clear intent to indoctrinate children, and how things are quickly going downhill in this regard. It seems we're quickly getting to the point where there is no such thing as wholesome entertainment. I've had to stop letting my daughter watch several children's shows on PBS due to this sort of thing. It seems the only real semi-safety in entertainment might be by avoiding new entertainment entirely. It used to be that Disney/Pixar movies were a pretty safe bet. They no longer are.

My friend casually wondered if it might not be time to separate ourselves from entertainment moving forward. I'm tending to feel the same way. I do believe I may not be going to many more movies moving forward -- and I feel like I have to carefully pre-watch even kids shows to make sure they don't contain indoctrination. And either way, I do not want to be giving my hard-earned money to the kingdom of the devil (a.k.a Disney). As a Disney fan I find this very disheartening. But I think it might be the path I need to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been onset to observe actors getting into character.  It is somewhat scary especially if the character has a "dark" side.   It can be similar to observing a schizophrenic or bipolar personality.   As a side note Joseph Goebbels (Hitler's propaganda minister) stated that entertainment is the most effective type of brainwashing.   That we tend to idolize and will try to emulate what we are entertained by.   Ever since I read that - I have become concerned with what entertains me. 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont like the way entertainment is going... but additionally, Sometimes when I see all these gay and transgender people on entertainment, I wonder how statistically realistic they are.

You look at the “Arrow” CW series and like 1/2 the main characters are gay, bi-sexual, or transgender. At some point, even if you support those ways of life, you gotta get bothered by the unrealistic amount of “woke” characters.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relevant chart is relevant.  I post it here because I keep noticing people aren't aware of it, and still think "the silent majority" or "the moral majority" is still a majority.  It isn't - it changed in our lifetimes.  9 years ago, to be exact.  

 

image.png.dda0ad4d989f4afe7a6b89b50c033869.png

Edited by NeuroTypical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Relevant chart is relevant.  I post it here because I keep noticing people aren't aware of it, and still think "the silent majority" or "the moral majority" is still a majority.  It isn't - it changed in our lifetimes.  9 years ago, to be exact.  

 

image.png.dda0ad4d989f4afe7a6b89b50c033869.png

 I think the older generation that was less comfortable with homosexuality has died off (not being rude, starting a fact) and they didn't pass along that moral teaching to their children. More and more younger people (including religious ones, amazingly) just don't have a problem with homosexuality. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, so in this case, the Disneys and Hasbros and PBS's (and every other company and advertiser including noncisgendered nonbinary nontraditionalmarriage stuff in their products), are simply following the money.  It's becoming insulting when people don't give favorable portrayals to such groups.  Decisions driven by dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, it is more the "focus" or focal point of the entertainment. If it is obvious the focal point is indoctrination or progressive agenda I stop watching the show. Obviously, that connects to my personal frame of reference and what I define as indoctrination.

I stopped watching a few shows because it was obvious the main point wasn't about the show, it was a progressive movement to say something is OK now that is not OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Feet was a hard show to stop watching.  Mumble's character was obviously progressive indoctrination, and the elders were obviously the evil old cadre of hardline Christians.  But at the same time, the penguins were kept safe through the long winter storms by the deific presence of The Great Guinn, who's reality was never questioned.

Edited by NeuroTypical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

For me, it is more the "focus" or focal point of the entertainment. If it is obvious the focal point is indoctrination or progressive agenda I stop watching the show. Obviously, that connects to my personal frame of reference and what I define as indoctrination.

I stopped watching a few shows because it was obvious the main point wasn't about the show, it was a progressive movement to say something is OK now that is not OK.

I understand where you are coming from and of course you have every right to watch whatever you want to. 

I think some people though will read a "progressive agenda" into something that just isn't there. If you (generic, not you meaning @Anddenex) are 100% convinced that big, scary "progressives" are polluting entertainment, than confirmation bias will kick in and you'll find it everywhere.

I've always wanted to do an experiment. I'd like to take someone who has never seen Saved by the Bell before and convince them that it's filthy, dirty, obscene and R rated. Then I'd have them watch it. See if they think it's "filthy, obscene, dirty, etc."  If they can say, with a straight face, that Saved by the Bell is rated R, then my theory that you'll find what you are looking for (confirmation bias) might be correct.

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a way, it's like hard left, radical feminism. If you are 100% convinced that men are evil and all are out to oppress and assault women, you'll find it everywhere. A man holding open the door for you? It's because he thinks you can't do it yourself. A man offering to drive on a date? It's because he thinks women are lousy drivers. A man offering you a seat on the Disney monorail? It's because he thinks you are weak and don't have the stamina to stand for five minutes. Forget that she was 8 months pregnant. A man smiling at you in church? He's obviously planning to assault you in the parking lot. A man not smiling at you? He doesn't respect women.

Same way of thinking, to some degree. A good prosecutor really can indict a ham sandwich. 

And don't get me wrong, even find some entertainment offensive and in poor taste. So it's not like I think everything out there is appropriate. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Separating from entertainment -- has the time fully come"

I think about this question a lot. I am a huge movie and TV geek. I live in a rural place, and there's not much to do for entertainment. Movies and TV are a way to escape into another world. Also, I think human stories are inherently entertaining. There's something very meaningful and engaging in hearing (or seeing) a story.

At the end of the day I'm pretty stressed out and just want an escape. I think, I should read a book, etc. but I always feel too tired. Netflix et al are my default way to recuperate each night.

I like to joke that one of the perils of the last days is excellent TV. TV shows have gotten very good in recent decades. By "good," I mean engaging and well done. Many top actors are moving from movies to TV, since movies are now largely brainless action flicks intended for a global audience. I have a long list of great shows I love - if we were talking in the 1980s I wouldn't even' be talking about TV.

As you have pointed out, though, the worldly media is getting worse. I honestly feel that in too many cases the entertainment industry is basically the church of Satan, preaching worldly doctrines. Particularly disturbing to me is how "dark" shows have gotten more popular. Dark in this sense means "gloomy; cheerless; dismal; evil; iniquitous; wicked," according to the dictionary. Seriously, this is not what I want going into my mind.

So, what to do?

  • Well, obviously, I am selective. There are still a lot of good things to watch out there. 
  • Also, VidAngel is great. If you don't know about it, you can set filters to filter out whatever you want. Some things are still R-rated to the core and can't be fixed (*ahem* Game of Thrones *ahem*) but most TV and movies are 98% decent, after you remove the poo from the cookie batter (see below, if you don't know the story).
  • My wife says BYU TV channel keeps getting better. I need to check it out. Obviously, the ideal solution is for good moral people to produce enough stuff for us to watch.
  • Keep an open mind. Personally, I am absolutely against LGBT marriage, because of the what I believe marriage is and should be. But the world has a different view - basically, we've got two types of marriage, two meanings for that word now, it seems to me. However, LGBT people are children of God too. Do I enjoy watching their relationships? - no, it's not entertaining to me. But I feel I can also learn to accept and love them and how they live, even if I don't think it follows the gospel teachings as I understand them.
  • Keep thinking about Plan B. Eventually, I think even Vidangel will be overwhelmed by the tide of just plain evil stuff, and I'll have to give it all up. (Also, Vidangel might go out of business - every other such company has. Evil Hollywood.) Any suggestions for my Plan B?

 

P.S. I just asked my wife about the two moms in Toy Story 4. She loved the movie and didn't even realize it was in there until she asked someone who saw it with her. So it's not "in your face," but you know that sort of thing will get worse in the future.

 

The story of poop in the cookies, if you don't know it (this version is annoying but makes the point)

Edited by tesuji

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about this topic. Growing up, I didn't listen to secular music, because my church told me that rock and roll was full of satanic messaging. Funny how nobody bemoaned the drunkenness and adultery/fornication that is so prominent in Country/Western. Then there were the boycotts of the 1980s of shows and material that were not "family friendly." We eventually grew out of that stage, and now the liberals suddenly think it's a good approach--boycotting Chick Fil-A, Walmart, etc.

The anti-Christian, pro-immorality messaging is just so prolific. I suspect the strongest answer--at least if we are to be "in the world but not of it" is to have our answers ready. Our children need to know why we "love the sinner and hate the sin." They need to know why we don't drink, smoke, gamble or chew, and why we choose to remain chaste unto marriage, and why we do not approve of men lying with men and women lying with women. They need to know why we insist that God created us male and female, and we need to honor that, regardless of any sense we have of gender dysphoria.

Sheltering only goes so far. If we push beyond, might our children not think we were hiding the truth from them? I'm done with boycotting, but I get the desire not to provide unnecessary exposure to immorality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

I have mixed feelings about this topic. Growing up, I didn't listen to secular music, because my church told me that rock and roll was full of satanic messaging. Funny how nobody bemoaned the drunkenness and adultery/fornication that is so prominent in Country/Western. Then there were the boycotts of the 1980s of shows and material that were not "family friendly." We eventually grew out of that stage, and now the liberals suddenly think it's a good approach--boycotting Chick Fil-A, Walmart, etc.

The anti-Christian, pro-immorality messaging is just so prolific. I suspect the strongest answer--at least if we are to be "in the world but not of it" is to have our answers ready. Our children need to know why we "love the sinner and hate the sin." They need to know why we don't drink, smoke, gamble or chew, and why we choose to remain chaste unto marriage, and why we do not approve of men lying with men and women lying with women. They need to know why we insist that God created us male and female, and we need to honor that, regardless of any sense we have of gender dysphoria.

Sheltering only goes so far. If we push beyond, might our children not think we were hiding the truth from them? I'm done with boycotting, but I get the desire not to provide unnecessary exposure to immorality.

You bring up some excellent points but there are others as well.  I know of many parents that attempted to shelter their children only to find they overwhelmed and ill equipped as they became older.  There is a book now out of print about teaching values - when we understand our own values and how we achieved them we can help our children to discover their values.  I will use the Book's multiple prescription of values:

#1. Something that is freely chosen.  Anything imposed cannot, by definition, be a value.  This is also defined by my understanding of the doctrine of agency.

#2. Chosen from among alternatives.  This is interesting when we consider teaching our children because it is obvious that the more alternatives they have the more someone will realize they have a choice.

#3. The choice must be after thoughtful consideration of the consequences of all the alternatives.  Obviously impulse or thoughtless choices do not create lasting values.

#4. Prizing and cherishing.  Obviously what someone values they want to keep and they will guard it and keep is priestein. 

#5. Affirming.  If someone is not willing to display something openly - it is not truly valued.  It may be something to which they are attracted but for which they are ashamed. 

#6. Acting upon choices.  When we value something we will act upon it - to achieve, keep and to understand better.

#7 We will repeat what we value.  We will do it over and over and glad we did.

 

In essence there are three categories that define our values - 1. we choose  2. we prize  3. we act

 

I believe when we are clear about our own values (as was Jesus) we teach such values by our choices - what we hold sacred - and how we behave (including our behavior when we do not think others are watching).  In contrast it seems to me that the Pharisees are the examples of teaching without values - that ends up as hypocrisy.  

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fether said:

I dont like the way entertainment is going... but additionally, Sometimes when I see all these gay and transgender people on entertainment, I wonder how statistically realistic they are.

You look at the “Arrow” CW series and like 1/2 the main characters are gay, bi-sexual, or transgender. At some point, even if you support those ways of life, you gotta get bothered by the unrealistic amount of “woke” characters.

 

It may have actually been a fellow/lady here, but I recall someone once bringing up "Doctor Who", a show that had its original long-running incarnation back in the 60s, I believe. If you are unaware, the show follows the adventures of a virtually-immortal time-traveling alien who is very old. And yet, only now in the recent edges of time suddenly everyone is LGTBQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Yep, so in this case, the Disneys and Hasbros and PBS's (and every other company and advertiser including noncisgendered nonbinary nontraditionalmarriage stuff in their products), are simply following the money.  It's becoming insulting when people don't give favorable portrayals to such groups.  Decisions driven by dollars.

You think Arthur is going to make more money because they had a gay wedding? Or that Toy Story 4 wouldn't have done as well had they not included what they did? Or that if Taylor Swift's latest song would have been about traditional romance it wouldn't have sold as well?

I don't believe for one second that adding that kind of thing into entertainment sells better. That is not why they're doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Anddenex said:

For me, it is more the "focus" or focal point of the entertainment. If it is obvious the focal point is indoctrination or progressive agenda I stop watching the show. Obviously, that connects to my personal frame of reference and what I define as indoctrination.

I stopped watching a few shows because it was obvious the main point wasn't about the show, it was a progressive movement to say something is OK now that is not OK.

That would be fine if Toy Story were going to be a movie just for me. When its primary target audience is my daughter and the like then it's a different...um...toy.....story.....

Edited by The Folk Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MormonGator said:

are 100% convinced that big, scary "progressives" are polluting entertainment, than confirmation bias will kick in and you'll find it everywhere

Someone would have to be pretty blind to not be 100% convinced that scary "progressives" are OBVIOUSLY polluting entertainment (and have been since the dawn of entertainment).

Edited by The Folk Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tesuji said:

P.S. I just asked my wife about the two moms in Toy Story 4. She loved the movie and didn't even realize it was in there until she asked someone who saw it with her. So it's not "in your face," but you know that sort of thing will get worse in the future.

I expect this is what we'll hear for a while...the edge just moving ever so slightly each time...until the frog is well boiled to death. Sorry. I'm jumping out now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

I have mixed feelings about this topic. Growing up, I didn't listen to secular music, because my church told me that rock and roll was full of satanic messaging. Funny how nobody bemoaned the drunkenness and adultery/fornication that is so prominent in Country/Western. Then there were the boycotts of the 1980s of shows and material that were not "family friendly." We eventually grew out of that stage, and now the liberals suddenly think it's a good approach--boycotting Chick Fil-A, Walmart, etc.

The anti-Christian, pro-immorality messaging is just so prolific. I suspect the strongest answer--at least if we are to be "in the world but not of it" is to have our answers ready. Our children need to know why we "love the sinner and hate the sin." They need to know why we don't drink, smoke, gamble or chew, and why we choose to remain chaste unto marriage, and why we do not approve of men lying with men and women lying with women. They need to know why we insist that God created us male and female, and we need to honor that, regardless of any sense we have of gender dysphoria.

Sheltering only goes so far. If we push beyond, might our children not think we were hiding the truth from them? I'm done with boycotting, but I get the desire not to provide unnecessary exposure to immorality.

Boycotting implies an organized effort.

Not consuming (and moreover not actually paying for) the manure served is not a boycott. I won't eat at In and Out Burger, for example. Because it's disgusting. If others love it then that their choice. I'm not boycotting In and Out Burger. I just don't eat there.

I think there's a balance in what you're saying about sheltering. I think the pendulum has swung WAY too far on the matter for so many people. Sometimes it's obvious. If you're letting your kids watch porn and then explaining to them how it's wrong, what message are they really receiving? (This should be obvious.)

Personally, I plan to teach through sheltering. As in, "We don't watch that kids' show. They promote the idea that two mommies is an acceptable form of marriage." Etc. People often respond as if my desire to not allow my child watch such things is only trying to hide them from harsh realities. That is partially true, but that's not what it's entirely about. I do believe that we should shelter children from things which are not age appropriate. But to treat it like, "Whatever --- the world's evil, so let's just drink the evil in while we talk about how we shouldn't drink the evil in..." -- just doesn't work for me. The real message they will get is that consuming things that are evil isn't so bad after all, despite the empty talk. If my actions follow suit -- this is wrong...we're turning it off -- then they get the message I'm trying to actually teach.

Now I fully realize I'm being a bit harsh in response to what you actually are saying here. So don't take it like I'm saying you've just given in to drinking in the evil. But I used your thought as a springboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take:

Entertainment has ALWAYS been the cultural bane of society.  It appeals to man's base nature.  Theater actors were the "dregs of society" from waaay back, farther than the Victorian era.  And before that, there was the minstrels, the court jesters, etc. etc., entertaining by stretching people's imaginations to the obscene of that era.  Hollywood actors, singers, et.al. are the same - even from the 30's and 40's - they were the ones stretching culture to the obscene of that era.  As the saying goes... "That's Entertainment".

So, my kids watching stupid stuff on Toy Story 4 doesn't bother me because it's something that they recognize as not-good regardless of how it is portrayed in the entertainment.  But that, of course, puts the responsibility fully on me to teach them to recognize the not-goods.

Anyway, my kids watch a lot of movies with me (we're movie fanatics) but they don't watch TV.  None of their close friends watch TV.  As a matter of fact, they think TV is for normies and celebrating Pride Month is for normies and making LGBTQ+ people "special" is for normies... the tide is turning with the younger Gen Z's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I understand where you are coming from and of course you have every right to watch whatever you want to.

I think some people though will read a "progressive agenda" into something that just isn't there. If you (generic, not you meaning @Anddenex) are 100% convinced that big, scary "progressives" are polluting entertainment, than confirmation bias will kick in and you'll find it everywhere.

I've always wanted to do an experiment. I'd like to take someone who has never seen Saved by the Bell before and convince them that it's filthy, dirty, obscene and R rated. Then I'd have them watch it. See if they think it's "filthy, obscene, dirty, etc."  If they can say, with a straight face, that Saved by the Bell is rated R, then my theory that you'll find what you are looking for (confirmation bias) might be correct.

I understand where you are coming from and of course you have every right to watch whatever you want to.

True. Thank you for your understanding.

I think some people though will read a "progressive agenda" into something that just isn't there. If you (generic, not you meaning @Anddenex) are 100% convinced that big, scary "progressives" are polluting entertainment, than confirmation bias will kick in and you'll find it everywhere.

True. Also true for people to recognize a wolf when they see it. The wolf doesn't have to be big or scary, it is simply what it is.

I've always wanted to do an experiment. I'd like to take someone who has never seen Saved by the Bell before and convince them that it's filthy, dirty, obscene and R rated. Then I'd have them watch it. See if they think it's "filthy, obscene, dirty, etc."  If they can say, with a straight face, that Saved by the Bell is rated R, then my theory that you'll find what you are looking for (confirmation bias) might be correct.

There are some people who would believe Saved by the Bell was not a good show. This highlights what I was saying "from my frame of reference." My parents didn't like us kids watching Saved by the Bell or 90210. I can fully comprehend why they did not like 90210. I to this day have never seen an episode of Friends. Other people, like my sister, rave about Friends and probably have seen the whole series multiple times. From my frame of reference, I didn't care about Friends.

I believe there is a Youtube video about Saved by the Bell, and someone pointing out how "bad" the show truly was for kids.

Let me provide an example, from my frame of reference, pertaining to focal point with two shows: Mrs. Doubtfire and Supergirl. Both shows had an alternative lifestyle being highlighted. Mrs. Doubtfire's focal point though was a father trying to make it possible to spend time with his children, which he had felt he had been robbed of time with them. It was funny. It was good from my frame of reference.

Supergirl on the other hand wasn't focused on Supergirl. Supergirl was the backdrop to a sister coming out. When episodes spend 15 minutes or so on coming out, when the show is Supergirl -- ya, I stopped watching the show because I wanted to see episodes on Supergirl. Not progressive agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Let me provide an example, from my frame of reference, pertaining to focal point with two shows: Mrs. Doubtfire and Supergirl. Both shows had an alternative lifestyle being highlighted. Mrs. Doubtfire's focal point though was a father trying to make it possible to spend time with his children, which he had felt he had been robbed of time with them. It was funny. It was good from my frame of reference.

Supergirl on the other hand wasn't focused on Supergirl. Supergirl was the backdrop to a sister coming out. When episodes spend 15 minutes or so on coming out, when the show is Supergirl -- ya, I stopped watching the show because I wanted to see episodes on Supergirl. Not progressive agenda.

From my frame of reference, Mrs. Doubtfire was funny but bad.  It normalizes divorce.  I was, of course, in the Philippines, where there was a movement to legalize divorce.  Good thing Mrs. Doubtfire, although gained lots of Filipino viewers, didn't influence culture too much to allow the movement to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'd have to see it to see what all the fuss is about.

Online at least, it seems that it was only two "moms" in a car dropping off a child in a scene that lasted a few seconds.    Has Pixar even confirmed that it was "two moms" or is this just an assumption?

Also, the Toy Story movies are full of plenty of adult jokes.   Why is it just the two moms (i this is even the case) that bring all the outrage?    What about the prostitute in a Toy Story movie?   Isn't that worse, especially since it's a running joke that has a lot more screen time?  

Anyway, if the scene was really meant to promote same sex marriage or something and was obvious, I guess I'd see a problem.   

Also, what if it were real rather than a movie.   If there was a kid that went to your child's school whom had "two moms" , and your kid asked about you about it, what would you say?    I'd tell mine to be nice to the child regardless of the circumstances of the parents.   Kids don't get to choose their parents.   

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now