Duck Dynasty Delimma and Why It Matters to Me

December 19, 2013

Sooo….Duck Dynasty’s patriarch, Phil Robertson made some remarks in a GQ magazine interview where he expressed his fundamental / evangelical Christian views regarding homosexuals, as per his interpretation of the Bible.  In response, A&E (a subset of Hearst and Disney corporations) put him on an indefinite probation from the show.  The issue has overwhelmed the internet.  Fully half of my Facebook feed is full of such, with some posts surprising me in their rigidity and origin.

Before going any further, my biases need explanation, especially as these biases have me confounded on what to think about the hooha.  This is not to say I think the whole blow up really deserves the attention it is getting.  Why I think that will be explained below.

Above all, I think celebrity worship is just plain silly.  Granted, sometimes when celebrity becomes a lightning rod for real issues, speaking out, or seriously considering one’s stance, it is important.  This is one of those instances.

In regards to my feelings on homosexuality, I really don’t feel one way the other about it, especially in regards to right or wrong.  Judge not, the shortest chapter in the Bible, is one foundation of my personal religious views.  I have known several people who either knew they were gay for a long time, and others who later discovered, realized, or came out about their sexuality, never feeling threatened or imposed upon by their orientation.  

In the former category, I could point to one gentleman who I worked with previously.  He is a wonderful man, probably 10 years my senior, who I would like to count as a good friend from that epoch of my life.  His sexuality was never an issue, an obstacle, or uncomfortable in regards to our friendship.  Beyond that, he was very OK with educating this naïve small town boy about issues regarding homosexuality.  For context, this was 1990 + Atlanta where a large homosexual population existed during the peak horror of the AIDS plague. 

In the latter category, several women I know realized their sexuality after we had active relations.  During college days, I was head over heels in love with several women who later came out.  In one case in particular, I made substantial life decisions to enhance the potential for a relationship.  With others, as early as high school, I enjoyed an active boyfriend / girlfriend relationship, a random make out session, or a pining hard core crush, only to learn later in life that they had come to their personal truth and I was no longer in the pool of candidates for their affection.  Despite this bummer, they still have my respect and friendship, if not longing thoughts about romance.

My 10 year old son and I are huge fans of Duck Dynasty.  We watch a lot of videos when we are together, especially since I had a hip injury followed by surgery and have been pretty much lame since last February.  I have pretty rigorous criteria for what we watch, be it movies, YouTube videos, or TV shows. 

First, there is entertainment value for both of us.   There needs to be some greater redeeming value.  Examples of this are valuable video experiences which I impose (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid most recently), talking cat videos, or shows which have something to teach respectively.  The last category is best exemplified by Mythbusters which discretely inserts proper scientific inquiry into good fun.  This category shows him experiences he might otherwise miss, expose him to possible career ideas (Making the Cut comes to mind as he has thought about Secret Service / Spy / Special Ops jobs, as most little boys do).  Good fun, good clean fun, is the overriding, basic qualification. 

Duck Dynasty largely satisfies these criteria.  We both enjoy the largely innocuous show.  The Robertson clan is very funny, often witty, and offers insight into another lifestyle’s detail.  We have shared laughs which had us doubled up while watching. 

My son has fallen in love with shooting and guns over the past few years, often badgering me for an opportunity to go hunting for squirrel and even deer.  Recently, Phil was shown gutting a catfish with his very queasy young granddaughters.  I believe this was my son’s first exposure to the necessary gore inherent in processing game.  Having hunted quite a bit in the past, the ethos of eat what you kill is a core belief.  This obviously entails having the fortitude to clean your kill.  I asked my son if he could gut an animal.  He shivered and said absolutely not.  Good life lesson, good argument for the next time he wants to go hunt.  There is no catch and release when you shoot something as opposed to hook something. 

I have known many Robertson-esque people in my life, some of whom are much loved, very large influences on both my son and me.  I relish their interactions with both of us.  When in high school, in rural Kentucky, kids were given a free pass to skip class twice a year:  during tobacco harvest, when the family income depended on their help, and the opening of deer season, when the family larder depended on their help.

Going deeper into personal beliefs, I have long believed the “of the earth” folks are more valuable now than ever before and have more to teach our modernized, tech dependent society in invaluable ways.  I tried to gear my life in that direction for several decades, only to learn the uncomfortable challenges which that way of life dictates, what it means to live that close to the bone or depend on the bounty of nature to support one.

I believe all of us in modern America could learn some very valuable lessons from the Robertsons.  Beyond the above, such would include entrepreneurship, dealing with hard times, life in a family business (another dashed hope of mine), and what the deep south or rural America is about.

The Robertsons, for better or worse, do not pull any punches.  You see what they are genuinely about with every show.  From beheading ducks in front of an elementary school class to Phil’s frequent appearances on the pulpit.  In other words, you get what you pay for.  I don’t feel they are pushing anything beyond the importance of being a redneck over being a yuppie, the importance of educating the younger generations about the same, and the requirement that one should be able to pee off the front porch without consequences.  It is what it is.

I have known, do know, and value knowing many who are fairly rigid in their religious belief, be it Christian, Buddhist, Jewish or Muslim.  I don’t feel the need to challenge them in their beliefs, nor do I feel the need to accept their views as the gospel.   Under no circumstances do I appreciate having one’s views forced upon me, regardless of those views’ political, religious, cosmological or whatever connotations.  I have found that I can see beyond the motivation to convert and accept and love those doing the converting.

As an aside, several times in my life I have opened my door and welcomed into my home proselytizers, mainly of the Church of the Latter Day Saints missionary bent.  Once, this was a devious, you asked for it way.  Two young Mormons showed up at my door mid-morning, about 10 am.  The visit was during the annual three day run for the Grateful Dead in Atlanta, circa 1991.   As the front yard would attest, full of bumper sticker covered microbuses and ratty cars, the house was full of sleeping dead heads, about 40 of them, scattered on couches and the floor.

When the fresh faced chaps knocked on the door, and I was the only person fully conscious at the time, I thought it would be a mutually educational experience to invite them in.  As is my experience with missionaries, they weren’t forcing anything on me, but giving me an opportunity to be educated.  From my hospitality, they got the same.  Beer cans and other detritus from a party which only ended a couple hours before, bleary eyed roommates and guests beginning to stir, surely made an impression.  I got a free Book of Mormon, and a couple others joined us on the couches in the living room for parts of the visit.  After they left, hoots and hollers resounded through the house, those of us experiencing it howling at the perceived impact on the fresh young fellows, those just rousing wondering what the hell just happened.

Bottom line – I respect these guys who wonder all over the planet to espouse their beliefs, regardless of how annoying I selfishly felt their intrusion.  In the multiple encounters I have had with missionaries, they have, to a man, not said you will burn for eternity if you don’t follow our dogma.  They are there to share and educate, fulfill their religious dictates, from my experience.  They operate on the presumption that what they are doing is a “low kill” proposition, few converts will emerge, but their job is to keep on keeping on in step with their beliefs. 

So, to the crux of the issue, Phil Robertson vs A&E.  This bit will most likely be less verbose than the preliminary groundwork.  On the one hand, there is Phil, a self-confessed Bible thumper, espousing his thoughts on homosexuality.  On the other hand, there is A&E distancing themselves from these divisive comments.  Each is standing by what they believe to be the right thing.

This dilemma has several tangents.  Personal / corporate belief, constitutional rights (free speech, religious freedom), and commercial viability come to mind.  I will address these in no particular order.

The First Amendment:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (Wikipedia).  Ergo, Phil and GQ had every latitude in delving into the subject.

Capitalism dictates placating those who pay the bills.  In regard to the network, they must cover their asses as to where those ever important advertising dollars come from.  This nugget of functionality requires action.

Here, I will opine.  Both parties had the right to act as they did, with the caveat of “at your own peril”.  For Phil, repercussions were obvious.  He is a celebrity.  Anything that comes out of his mouth is going viral.  For A&E, they must, first and foremost, as big business, ensure income and thus fear the implications.  I will withhold opinion on the legitimacy of the LBGT community’s complaints, they are free to fight as hard as they can afford to.

As things go, I think A&E will get the short stick.  The advertisers may fall lock step behind the network’s actions.  The big however is A&E sure as hell knew what they were getting into.  The Robertson’s faith, and other philosophies, is front and center.  If the network airs bits of Phil’s sermons as a part of the show, extrapolating his personal beliefs isn’t rocket science.  Therefore, the network should have seen it coming. 

What is the potential outcome?  My gut says a great deal, if not the majority; of the Duck Dynasty fans appreciate the Robertson’s lifestyle and beliefs.  That is why they watch.  The most popular reality TV show ever is largely buttressed by these lifestyle and belief issues.  Bottom line – A&E is going to see an enormous backlash from viewers and will have to reconcile this with advertisers’ input.  This doesn’t even consider the reaction from the rest of the Robertson clan and the viability of the show.

In sum, I really don’t think either party is in the wrong, entirely.  I do think Phil was frank and sincere, and forthcoming in his acceptance and lack of judgment of others, despite his personal convictions.  A&E is covering their corporate ass, with no concern for the greater philosophically significant aspects of the situation.  14 million viewers, and huge swaths of America, cannot be ignored or suppressed, regardless of a divergence in opinion.

My bet is A&E will lose the Robertsons or, at least, this battle.  The Duck Dynasty will continue whether or not on the network.  I vote for personal conviction over corporate paranoia, despite my support and empathy for the LGBT community or my questioning of the Bible as the true word of God.

see also:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2013/12/19/255430555/duck-and-cover-what-exactly-is-the-point
 http://benswann.com/michael-lotfi-duck-commander-phil-robertsons-first-amendment-rights-violated/

update:  duck commander (the robertson family) responds - http://duckcommander.com/news/robertson-family-offical-statement#.UrOnrAIUZ5Q.facebook