MissWrite:



Thanks for sharing; that was a good read. And I agree wholeheartedly: propaganda is a very potent tool in shaping culture. Truth be told, you cannot escape propaganda. It starts with what you're being told as a child by your parents at home. Religion and the multimedia are agents of propaganda that influence us soon afterwards. It is sociocultural conditioning. It stands to reason then that our current culture is a product of propaganda as well(as used in the text: information). And our current culture is heteronormative because these were the stories that were propagated and popularized for ages. They are the stories that have shaped our thinking and expectations.

If heteronormativity is a product of propaganda (as every homogenous culture must be a product of external conditioning) how does it then have such irrefutable merit? And why must we now stop the propaganda from allowing diversity when it is that same propaganda that excluded these naturally occurring tendencies in the first place?

There are two variables to be considered here: biology and sociology; interior and exterior. The interior is the construct of the individual, and the exterior is the social construct. The individual would find fulfilment in expressing their biology (interior) but social conditioning may put them at variance with that if their preferences are prohibited. Imagine creating an artificial environment where, via propaganda, homosexuality were touted as the only acceptable form of being. A heterosexual person would ultimately feel caged because the exterior cannot change the interior. Social conditioning cannot change biology. It can only force a person to suppress their biology at the expense of their happiness. Since you already started with the Architecture metaphors, there is a popular phrase that comes to mind right now: Form follows function; instead of function follows form. Designing spaces from inside out allows a building spread out organically. Naturally. Truthfully. Working from the outside in, is a sculptural approach that is concerned with political correctness and keeping up appearances at the expense of functional fluidity; often creating awkward spaces that greatly compromise use. By that, I mean that biology must be considered when we chose to apply propaganda to condition our environment.

What Disney want to do is to be more inclusive, so that everyone feels accepted. They are not imposing the gay culture on heterosexuals because they would still cater to a heterosexual audience by telling their numerous sappy love stories featuring princes and a princesses (or some modern derivative). They already deviated from the predominantly white characters to include Arabian and Chinese characters (in Jasmine from Aladdin and Mulan) and they are also contemplating featuring an African princess after the success of Marvel's Black Panther. Does that mean that white people should suddenly feel threatened by some crazy notion that black people want to impose their culture on the world? I think that's just silly. It's all in the interest of diversity and finding new niches that can rake in substantial profits. If anyone seems to be imposing on the other, it is heterosexuals who expect gays to conform to their lifestyle and not the other way round. Gay people only want to be allowed to be themselves. They don't want stories to preclude heterosexuality, they only want stories to stop excluding gays. Why does this matter? Stories give us something to look up to. They make us hopeful. And everyone deserves to see a world of possibilities.

It is expected that there would be more gay people once there is more acceptance in society. But that is only because they would feel safe to come out of hiding.

CAPSLOCKED:


YOU SHOULD BE WORSHIPPED LIKE THE GOD THAT YOU ARE.

MissWrite:



....


We all have a lot to learn. You did not give me that list of stories rejected for lack of LGBTQ content.

I liked Moonlight a lot. It made me very emotional; and I cannot fault the fact that it won three oscars. But I think it's very disingenuous of you to find the fact that the LGBTQ story won 3 oscars when La La Land won 6 that year. I would say it was La La land that swept the awards last year and not Moonlight. Why did La La Land sweep up the awards? Is there a potential conspiracy theory here?

MissWrite:

Smh.......All I see here is insensitivity and wilful ignorance.

MissWrite:



....


We all have a lot to learn. You did not give me that list of stories rejected for lack of LGBTQ content.

I liked Moonlight a lot. It made me very emotional; and I cannot fault the fact that it won three oscars. But I think it's very disingenuous of you to find the fact that the LGBTQ story won 3 oscars when La La Land won 6 that year. I would say it was La La land that swept the awards last year and not Moonlight. Why did La La Land sweep up the awards? Is there a potential conspiracy theory here?

MISEDUCATIONS:
but gays still want a gay bond regardless of profitability. they are pushing an agenda not a story that will play well. you need to educate yourself on agendas.
Gays want to force their lifestyle through movies while you naively shout "Hollywood is trying to be inclusive". you are an atheist and you see nothing wrong with homosexuality but the rest of us do.
that Sesame Street petition you glossed.

IamLEGEND1:
Gay people have been around for as long as modern humans have and in that time heterosexuality has been the dominant lifestyle that was more or less forced on said gay people. tell me, has that made gay people disappear?
And It always amuses me when bigots hide behind religion as their justification for hating other humans like them. why does she have to be an atheist? because she wishes everyone lived his life and lets other's live theirs? educate yourself, mate.

MISEDUCATIONS:
and how long will humanity last if we all went gay?
isnt it the religious bigots (muslims in this case) who are moving to the West through mass immigration to enjoy the fruits of the "open-minded" gay fools in the West who now face Under-population because of Abortions and Homosexuality?? you are too funny.

WORDWORLD:


Who would you think wrote these words?!

"There are television sets in every home, every restaurant, every hotel room, and every shopping mall— now they're even small enough to carry in your pocket like electronic rosaries. It is an unquestioned part of everyday life. Kneeling before the cathode-ray god, with our TV Guide concordance in hand, we maintain the illusion of choice by flipping channels".(chapters and verses). 1

The writer was the man who founded the most famous public Satanist organization in America (the Church of Satan founded in 1966), Anton LaVey. He is also the author of a number of other books including "The Satanic Bible."

In all seriousness, LaVey continues to promote the religious significance of television, saying that:

... The birth of TV was a magical event foreshadowing its satanic significance. The first commercial broadcast was aired on Walpurgisnacht, April 30th, 1939, at the New York World's Fair. Since then, TV's infiltration has been so gradual, so complete that no one even noticed. People don't need to go to church any more; they get their morality plays on television.2


LaVey compares satellite dishes and antennas to church-top crosses and notes that TV has become, in effect, the major religion of the masses, even calling the television set the Satanic family altar.

In his book entitled The Devil's Notebook, published in 1992, LaVey espouses more of his Satanist philosophy and describes in detail how he sees television as the major mainstream infiltration of the new Satanic religion. He likens the entertainers and newscasters to the clergy of the TV religion, who use their cathode-ray pulpit to spread what he calls the word. He says that the local newscasters are the parish priests who are part of what he calls a church.

Certainly when looking at television today, one wonders how we have grown to tolerate such violence, sexual innuendoes, explicit sexual scenes, evolutionary humanism, profanity, and so on.

Anton LaVey sees television as the medium through which Satanism is being promulgated more and more. What then is Satanism? There are certainly different forms, but Satanism for LaVey boils down to the worship of man. It is nothing but evolutionary humanism (man is an animal and man sets the rules) which is the underlying philosophy of most television programming. No wonder LaVey characterizes television the way he does. As we will see, evolution is foundational to his Satanism.

Burton Wolfe, a priest in the Church of Satan, in the introduction to LaVey's Satanic Bible, states:

"Satanism's growing popularity has naturally been accompanied by scare stories from religious groups complaining that the Satanic Bible now outsells the Christian Bible on college campuses and is a leading causative factor in youngsters turning away from God."3

Certainly the philosophy of Satanism is alive and growing on college campuses.

Burton Wolfe claims that LaVey maintains that "evil" is "live" spelled backward and should be indulged in." He goes on to say that Satanism is a "blatantly selfish, brutal philosophy. It is based on the belief that human beings are inherently selfish, violent creatures, that life is a Darwinian struggle for survival of the fittest, that only the strong survive and the earth will be ruled by those who fight to win the ceaseless competition that exists in all jungles—including those of urbanized society."4

Read carefully what LaVey says in his Satanic Bible and The Devil's Notebook, and think about all the young people today who are devouring this material:

Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all fours, who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development," has become the most vicious animal of all!5
Are we not all predatory animals by instinct? If humans ceased wholly from preying upon each other, could they continue to exist?
Is not "lust and carnal desire" a more truthful term to describe "love" when applied to the continuance of the race? Is not the "love" of the fawning scriptures simply a euphemism for sexual activity, or was the "great teacher" a glorifier of eunuchs? 6
What good are friends if they can't do you any good?
The hunter must hunt. The moment he stops he becomes the hunted.
Strive, reach, and take. Then you shall not be taken.7
The above could really be summarized as "eat or be eaten"; survival of the fittest; nature red in tooth and in claw—evolutionism!

USA Today in March 1993 carried a story entitled "Kids' aggression linked to TV." The article stated, "The more television they watch, the more violent and disobedient elementary-school children become, suggests a large study.... Worse problems show up in those who see two hours or more of TV a day ... MTV is linked to disobedient and argumentative behavior. Reality-based programs are tied to aggression—from bullying others to stealing and throwing temper tantrums."

Many other studies give frightening correlations between television programs and behavior. No wonder LaVey said "We can use TV as a potent propaganda machine. The stage is set for the infusion of true satanic philosophy and potent (emotionally inspiring) music to accompany the inverted crosses and pentagrams."8

Now I am not telling everyone to destroy his or her television sets. This tool can be used very effectively for the Lord.

However, the sad fact is that most parents have not recognized how humanistic and destructive most available programs are.

They haven't recognized that their children are being indoctrinated in what is, in effect, Satanist philosophy that man has a right to do whatever he wants.

In his Satanic Bible, LaVey quotes someone else as saying:

"Times have changed. Religious leaders no longer preach that all our natural actions are sinful. We no longer think sex is dirty--or that taking pride in ourselves is shameful--or that wanting something someone else has is vicious.... If you want proof of this, just look at how liberal the churches have become. Why, they're practicing all the things that you [Satanists] preach." LaVey goes on to say, "Satanists hear these, and similar statements, all the time; and they agree wholeheartedly."

(THE LAST QUOTE IS AN EXAMPLE OF, WHEN SOMEONE CURSES ANOTHER PERSON IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF MARRY, FOR ADVOCATING ABORTION WHILE THIS SOMEONE CURSING PROPAGATES, PROMOTES, PORNOGRAPHY. LOVES IT WHOLE HEARTEDLY AND A FORNICATOR AND AN ADVOCATE OF FORNICATION. YET, FEELS SOME SENSE OF RIGHTOUSNESS, CURSING IN THE NAME OF JESUS. THAT THE KIND OF RELIGIOUS FOLKS OF TODAY'S WORLD.

"The REAL ANTI-CHRIST is he who turns the wine of an original idea into the water of MEDIOCRITY" (Eric Hoffer)

. Filling in the gap................ Did you fill, HYPOCRITES or SATANS MASQUERADING AS HUMAN BEINGS?)

@Ednut1

This was written by a certain Kenneth Ham, very well researched. (Know the Enemy, a Critique of Anto Lavey's books)

Once again, am not asking anyone to go destroy their TV and e.t.c. JUST FIND A WAY OF CURING YOURSELF OF YOUR HYPOCRISY.

Anytime the issue Homosexualism comes up, 'Heterosexuals' who are themselves FORNICATORS and ADULTERERS are quick to come to feast as if not realising it's an extension of their choice of EVIL.

EVIL BEGETS EVIL!

Transcending oneself, a parting from the 'ANIMAL' in MAN/WOMAN, in an ascending and radiating order, heights of NOBILITY becoming truely HUMANE is a great imperative of the essence of being human.

Attainable not by RHETORICS, THEORETICAL VALIDATION but PRACTICE, working within a framework of LEGITIMATE EQUILIBRIUM of ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

"Let it be clear that it is EVIL that is opposed to GOOD and not inversely". (Frithjof Schuon)

IamLEGEND1:
Gay people simply existing won't make everyone gay in as much as rearing goats won't make you start communicating with people by bleating.

but for the sake of this argument and to show you how shallow your logic is, let us assume that what you said is true and we're all going to become gay:

Let us say the first 50 modern humans appeared around 10,000 years ago and among them were 5 gay people (not accounting for anyone in the closet). That makes them 10% of humanity.
scale that up to today's population of 7 billion and you have around 70million gay people. but because the gay people are turning us, we now estimate gay people to be around 150 million worldwide.
at this rate, it'll take us roughly 50,000 years to become a planet inhabited solely by homosexuals.

and guess what, this 'underpopulation' in the west that you speak of.. they have the right idea. Earth is finite and at this rate we're going to burn through all resources and face extinction 83 times faster than it would take us to gay our species into oblivion.

So maybe you should reshuffle your priorities and drop uncontrolled breeding to the bottom of your list.

IamLEGEND1:
Keep tutoring these_fools. you're doing the Lord's work.

MissWrite:


Thank you, Legend....... . Unfortunately, some people are beyond redemption; and we just have to accept this inevitable loss to humanity.

IamLEGEND1:
Keep tutoring these_fools. you're doing the Lord's work.

SalomonKane:
it was never up to you to redeem anybody, in the first place.

MISEDUCATIONS:
in which world do atheists redeem people? redeem them to where exactly?

SalomonKane:
are you religious, if yes, which do you subscribe to?

MISEDUCATIONS:
im a christian

Tamarapetty:
They added a gay couple in ''loud house'' too.

Shugavee:
really who n who

Tamarapetty:
His bestfriend's parents are two gay men

MISEDUCATIONS:
its funny how we always think people have a choice in today's world. our tastes, preferences, likes, opinions and desires are always shaped by the media consciously or unconsciously. people have an illusion of choice.
the gay population is just 2% of the total population. yet that 2% must now force its tastes on the 98%. its hillarious.
its the tyranny of the minority whose vote doesnt even count. yet the majority chose a gvt that now pushes the vision of the minority

SalomonKane:
i see.

Shugavee:
Disney is a illuminati station!! Infact cartons in general r ran by satanic church members!! Disney is just Oga ,,, even in Barbie fairytale cartons u see it there!! Avatar portrays the worst , cause earth , water, fire and air is the four elements that’s runs the world according to the satanic church!! I wanted to do illuminati exhibition in carton n movies in my project bCk in school but my Schoo picked music for me instead of movies! Well cartons r very evil,,, they make children believe in witches ,,, n tell them there are good witches!! They talk about ghost n spirituality, magic!!. Monster high is extremely satanic,, a creature with snakes on his head displayed for children’s viewing!! Gayy in cartons is coming soon!! So let’s be watchful!!! My kids r only gonna watch cartons I will personally download for them

karlboss:



[quote author=karlboss post=70892347]

Could this be the reason kumuyi said that television would lead to hell and is a sin?

karlboss:


Self control can be achieved when an individual reach a stage of maturity and can then choose the kind of control one wants to place on himself or herself. In this case where children are bombarded with gay stuff where can self control come in

I believe the agenda is to make children see nothing wrong in homosexuality and funny enough it's already happening

I stumbled on an app called amino the app is for young people even children almost every one on that app is bisexual really crazy bro

karlboss:


Could this be the reason kumuyi said that television would lead to hell and is a sin?

MISEDUCATIONS:
said the blind man sitting at the coner of the round table talking to his deaf wife.

WORDWORLD:


My response was based on your question


The choice of the word "WOULD" means a DEFINATE. My response was "COULD" meaning, depending on one's choice of usage.

As to this recent post of yours relating my response to the subject matter 'GAY CARTOONS' than your original question you've asked, I implore that you be patient until I reply Misswrite. I PROMISE TO MENTION YOU.

WORDWORLD:


My response was based on your question


The choice of the word "WOULD" means a DEFINATE. My response was "COULD" meaning, depending on one's choice of usage.

As to this recent post of yours relating my response to the subject matter 'GAY CARTOONS' than your original question you've asked, I implore that you be patient until I reply Misswrite. I PROMISE TO MENTION YOU.