Bill O'Reilly Says 'Glee' Will Cause Kids to Experiment with Being Transgender and Gay: VIDEO
On last night's O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly and Gretchen Carlson sounded the right-wing alarms over a new transgender character on Glee, asserting that the show will compel kids to "experiment" with being transgender and gay, Equality Matters reports.
O'Reilly also compared homosexuality to smoking in the offensive segment.
Said O'Reilly: "If you make the behavior of these people ... if children hear it, unsupervised children, okay who don’t have parents watching their -- they might go out and experiment with this stuff...When I was a teenager and I saw James Dean smoking, it made me want to smoke...a lot of these dopey kids are confused about who they are. They’re confused."
Added Carlson: "I wholeheartedly believe, in today’s society, that kids are experimenting with homosexuality. We see it in celebrities who maybe just do it on the side, and it may be drug-fueled...I totally agree with Bill that this causes kids to experiment. And if we didn’t– why do we have any rules in society then if we don’t try and set some parameters for our children to live their lives? I just think that this is way over the top."
Judge Jeannine Piro was there to offer a disgusted and dissenting voice, thankfully.
Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...
And that explains why, surrounded by four very straight brothers I turned to experimenting with "the gay".
Bill O'Reilly is an oaf.
Posted by: JackFkTwist | Apr 20, 2012 2:09:29 PM
I have four straight brothers too!
Posted by: Paul R | Apr 20, 2012 2:14:54 PM
@JACKFKTWIST Bad argument. To refuse to acknowledge that the majority of the male population in particular (and to a lesser extent the female population) has some bisexual tendencies that are stifled by a homophobic culture is to close your eyes to reality.
And this is where those of you who advocate the "Born This Way" notion are off the farm--our real future lies in freeing all men from the restrictions on their sexual behavior that a homophobic culture creates.....NOT in promoting a "straight"/"day", "born this way", "there is no choice" ideology.
That old ideology is defensive and results in us having to play on the field of the Religious Right, implying that their notion that homosexuality is "immoral" is correct, whereas the new ideology that I support throw that notion right out the window.....
Posted by: Rick | Apr 20, 2012 2:23:39 PM
like his watching Roy Rogers & The Lone Ranger made him a cowboy?
fool, give people some credit; thank the fates the vast majority of people are not all like you...
Posted by: mike/ | Apr 20, 2012 2:27:33 PM
Yes, some of us here will agree with O'Reilly. There is a spectrum - people who are so straight they would never consider experimenting, those straight who would experiment and not like same-sex relations, straight people who MIGHT like it as much or somewhat less than straight sex, and people who live a "straight" life who really are gay and would either discover this or (finally) admit to to themselves. Interesting how everyone here pretends that the experimenters all fall into the last category. It is those who fall into the third category (potential bisexuals) who O'Reilly and most of his fellow conservatives are worried about. Those who fall into the "gay but don't know it/haven't admitted it" category SHOULD be "experimenting."
But truthfully we have no idea how many people fall into each of these categories. Hence, our conservatism - which you keep insisting is "hate."
OK, you can start throwing the internet tomatoes now......
Posted by: Mary | Apr 20, 2012 2:30:41 PM
@Mary Why are you "worried" about "potential bisexuals?" Because you think that anyone who has any heterosexual desires whatsoever should never have sex with someone of the same gender? Why is that better than having everyone find their optimal balance and pursue it?
Posted by: Rick | Apr 20, 2012 2:36:10 PM
Mary....get a stroke already and die you c*nt
Posted by: b.t | Apr 20, 2012 2:37:44 PM
Mary, you're useless on here. You're so desperate for friends and attention, you camp out on a site where a majority of posters feel so sorry for you. Your years on this planet are numbered....go spend them with someone who loves you. Do you have any of those in your life? You old hag.
Posted by: Frank C. | Apr 20, 2012 2:39:01 PM
Yay! Mary...the fake, phoney martyr who tries to play it off like she's so not a troll, has just revealed what a huge troll she is with this one post. Every fake little "I feel so bad for this kid who commited suicide" message where she tries to get us to think she's not a bigot went right down the tube with that last post. Mary, your colors were revealed, but we all already called you out on your bull before. You're one sorry, old bat if all you have to do in your life is camp out 24/7 on a gay blog.
Posted by: IonMovies | Apr 20, 2012 2:41:35 PM
Mary, you're not a "hater"...you're a troll. Hater would imply most of us care about what you say or think. Troll means most of us have called you out on not contributing anything here except flaunting your ignorance.
Posted by: USC Trojan Fan | Apr 20, 2012 2:42:53 PM
Kids experiment with everything. But they end up being what they are at their core, eventually, even some after they are married with kids of their own.
I a-l-m-o-s-t agree with Rick. It's all just sex, there's degrees of everything that's in-between gay and straight.
What's harmful is how society views certain types of sex in one way and other types of sex in another way. Or certain types of gender identity one way and other types another way. It's all wrapped up in fear.
In reality the only type of sex that is wrong is when it's forced on another person or publicly displayed in front of people who don't want to watch it. Otherwise, it's two consenting people doing what they want.
End of story.
Posted by: johnny | Apr 20, 2012 2:45:49 PM
@RICK If the "new ideology that (you) support" once again includes heaping shame, blame, anger and disgust at gays who are not "masc" enough for you-- then, as usual, any hint of truth in your current argument is full-on discredited. It is a tired and so-over-it policy of hate and homophobia that you continue NON-STOP to promote on this site. I get it. It is your schtick. It makes you feel important or relevant, or whatever... but the predictability of you shouting your hate from your faceless closet is just so old. Little Kiwi and countless others have called you out on it articulately and mercilessly for what feels like years-- you seem to enjoy it. Some sort of comment-posting-S&M you get off on, I guess. But the truth is that the hate-filled venom you are always spewing at those you so homophobically judge as "not-masc-enough" for you speaks volumes about your own frightened and self-hating world. It is cool to have a different opinion than the majority of the community- but to believe your view is better because you are more "masc" (?!) is creepy, wrong and likely puts you on the road to Dahmer-ville as far as mental health is concerned.
Posted by: iawl | Apr 20, 2012 2:49:31 PM
Fox News, Fox Broadcasting and 20th Century Fox Television (Production company for Glee) are all part of the same corporate giant News Corp. It's interesting that they allow one division to criticize another so blatantly. You can be assured that this didn't go unnoticed by the Broadcasting and Television Production executives. If I were a shareholder, I won't be too happy that internal resources were being used to bash the company products.
Posted by: Bob | Apr 20, 2012 2:52:37 PM
As for the new Glee character, has anyone noticed that after all the people asking the show's producers to add a black boy as a significant character, when they finally do the boy is transgender? Just asking.
Posted by: keating | Apr 20, 2012 2:53:53 PM
I don't know what he's worried about. The show has become so unwatchable that it will have little affect on gay, straight, trans, bi, experimenting, etc., except to turn the channel no matter how much one may enjoy the music.
Posted by: LincolnLounger | Apr 20, 2012 2:54:26 PM
I don't know what he's worried about. The show has become so unwatchable that it will have little affect on gay, straight, trans, bi, experimenting, etc., except to turn the channel no matter how much one may enjoy the music.
Posted by: LincolnLounger | Apr 20, 2012 2:54:28 PM
"Because you think that anyone who has any heterosexual desires whatsoever should never have sex with someone of the same gender? Why is that better than having everyone find their optimal balance and pursue it?"
Because, Rick, we have no idea how much upheaval this could cause in the lives of millions of people. Societies en masse have never tried such a policy. (short version of the argument).
Frank C, do you read minds? How would you know what most people on Towleroad feel toward me....or anyone else? If I wanted friends and attention I'd be saying things that people WANT to hear. But I'm a pain in the ass because I think for myself and don't respect the sacred cows of either the left or the right. If I ever posted on Free Republic with any regularity I'd have the same problem. And I have plenty of people who love me. But even if I didn't, wouldn't someone looking for love be on match.com?
And "B.T., we know which Canadian poster you are. As I've said before, your style is too distinctive to be hidden.
Posted by: Mary | Apr 20, 2012 2:58:58 PM
Fox News commentator creating free publicity for a Fox show.
Ever get the feeling you're being played?
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 20, 2012 3:02:30 PM
IAWL, it's exactly as you put it.
there's a reason that the "i hate femmes" crowd can never, EVER, put a face and name to their comments.
it's the same reason anti-gay conservative politicians get busted in public bathrooms with their lips around a stranger's cock.
Posted by: LittleKiwi | Apr 20, 2012 3:03:09 PM
Rick...the old bitter, psycho, deranged, nut job (with an extremely sociopath like complex toward feminine gays)....having a conversation with Mary. An equally outlandish wack job, old, bitter, misinformed and senile. You just can't make this stuff up. But these people do exist. In fact, they post in every thread on this site with one insane comment after another
Posted by: LionsG | Apr 20, 2012 3:14:49 PM
How many alias's does Rick have on here?
I know one is Ratbastard and the other is Jason. But I'm starting to sincerely lose count.
Posted by: Coolersack | Apr 20, 2012 3:15:43 PM
@Coolersack....Basically, anytime you see someone go off on a homophobic, irrational, tirade against fem gays (to which there are many in our community, and they rock!)....know it's coming from Rick. The bi polar 54 year old certifiable nut. Always remember that.
Posted by: Steve-ATL | Apr 20, 2012 3:17:30 PM
Is UFFDA Rick also?
Posted by: Coolersack | Apr 20, 2012 3:17:57 PM
Yes, I've long suspected UFDDA as being Rick. Considering how often he agrees with Rick, and his own disturbing fixation with feminine gays, and belittling them, all while revealing he doesn't have much exposure to gay men or the gay community, I think UFDDA is one of Rick's personalities in his head. To which I truly believe exist, and depending on the particular meds taken or not taken that day, can appear on here.
Posted by: USC Trojan Fan | Apr 20, 2012 3:20:18 PM
I saw a lot of straight lovin' on TV. I never really tried it. I just didn't want to, and I wasn't afraid my friends would accuse me of being straight.
Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Apr 20, 2012 3:29:05 PM