Sam Brinton held a leadership position with the DC chapter of Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a sacrilegious drag group

submitted by xoenix from (thepostmillennial.com)

all 5 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]JulienMayfair 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence were always known for being funny and no more "sacrilegious" than, say, Monty Python. I wouldn't take this too seriously. I don't think they take themselves that seriously, though that might have changed recently since everyone seems to take themselves painfully seriously nowadays . . .

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

changed recently since everyone seems to take themselves painfully seriously nowadays . . .

When identity is elevated to the status of sanctity.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I’m a lapsed Catholic atheist and I have to say that the more I’ve found out about the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence the more hacked off I’ve become. I don’t care about the offensiveness, you’ve no right not to be offended, but it’s the hypocrisy- these people would never tolerate this sort of thing being done to any other religion and we know this because when it was done, Charlie Hebdo, an awful lot of people said that the victims at CH brought the massacre on themselves (not to mention all the media who refused to publish the cartoons).

So the media doesn’t get to point at the Catholics who are mildly upset at being mocked, because they’re the first to complain and scream Islamophobia when someone even makes a joke about Mohammed (not to mention the fact that deaths always seem to follow).

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I give zero fucks about them existing or doing their bit, people do have a right to free expression, but they are basically a group that exists solely to mock and offend a certain religious group, and that's the sort of thing that can easily cross the line from subversive comedy to being intentionally antagonistic.

Like if you're running a comedy show that is mocking a religious group, go for it, anyone from that religious group who attends and gets offended is an idiot.

I'd you are going off on some other event doing it isn't altogether wise to headline a group that's going to be divisive towards a large portion of your audience.

In this case the backlash is coming around because the LA Dodgers have bungled their way into the culture war in a very incompetent style. First they unwisely book a group that's gonna piss off a large portion of their customer base that has no relationship with baseball really, then when they got backlash from that they backed off which pissed off the LGBT activists, and now they're kinda put themselves in a situation where no matter what they do their gonna piss off a lot of people.

Had they merely avoided controversial displays in the first place it's likely everyone would have been happy.

I like some good controversial stuff myself but I'm not sure a sports game is the venue to do it. Personally I wouldn't mind myself much if I got a free strip show at my baseball game but, if I was running a baseball games event planning I'd nix just about any show you wouldn't be comfortable with showing on G rated daytime television.

Your fan base is people who like baseball, you don't want to play the culture war there, once you're in it you lose, at this point you either face boycott by the right or boycott by the left depending on what you do. Regardless that's probably a 20% loss in customer interest that will be hard to make back.

[–]OuroborosTheory 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

tbf they did arrest someone for free speech after that: Dieudonné