Gay couple asked to reverse "marriage is so gay" shirt at Dollywood

I guess I need to return that big Yellow wig i just bought - I was going to dress up as Dolly Parton this year for the big drag pageant... <End Satire>

Carrie J. said:
Maybe it's must me, but I really think this whole situation is being taken out of context and therefore being blown out of proportion. It isn't a gay rights issue. Period.

I think Dollywood was actually being an ally to the LGBT community.

Yes, exactly.

They weren't asked to hide the shirt because they are gay, they were asked to hide the shirt because of the shirt.

I assume the park’s real position on all of this is very simple and dollar centric, and they don’t really give a hoot about being pro or anti anything. They want the LGBT community and their families to come to the park and spend some money. They want southern Baptist families of 11 to don their long pants and denim skirts and come spend some money. They want UT frat boys to come and spend some money before fall classes start up in Knoxville. They want roller coaster enthusiasts with their propensity for over analyzing everything related to the amusement business to make a trip and spend some money. And they simply try to put together a product and atmosphere in which all these factions can coexist as happily as possible and minimize the number of wallet toting people they piss off... knowing full well there will always be a few.

Even if the park agreed with most of us, myself included, that this particular shirt was a clever and harmless expression, I think selective enforcement of whether particular buzz words or phrases are allowable on a case by case basis based upon intent, double entendre, implied humor, etc. would be mighty difficult to implement.

If the park chooses to not allow the same phrase on shirts in cases where there is clearly a more bigotry laced intent, then I think it makes sense to simply not allow it at all. Perhaps in this case it was obviously a benign usage of it, although keep in mind that the park staff has to make that call very quickly. But there could be other examples come along which fall in between and it may not be so clear either way.

I don't understand why being in the Bible belt or the park having a Gospel Music Museum on property has anything to do with it. Gay people can still be Christians. Some Christian sects will try to make gays an enemy of Christianity, but Gays are just the exact people that Jesus would be best friends with.

I think that the Westburro wackjobs have totally messed up what the religion is all about. Like many religions, there are two sides to the Christian religion.

And, I think that Dollywood probably hires a lot of homosexuals to perform in their shows and to work at their parks, so they are probably on the "love" side of the religion and not the "hate" side.

Did I just open another can of worms?

There are a bunch of questions.

The first is whether or not the shirt, itself, absent any other context (as in, who is wearing it and with what purpose), is offensive, and to whom.

The closely-related second is whether or not there are some contexts in which it is offensive, and others in which it is not.

These two are intertwined. My take on it (which is just another guy's opinion) is that it depends on the context. I come down on the "Political statement/reclaiming of an offensive term" side, but that's because it was a lesbian couple wearing it. That will still offend people, but in the "we are making you a little uncomfortable by challenging your preconceptions" way, not the "this is a derogatory term that we are using to hurt a specific set of people" way.

The third: does the park get to decide that the shirt isn't acceptable? Yep, absolutely, no questions asked, and it doesn't matter why the park finds it unacceptable---though the specific reason makes a difference to how *I* view it. For example, if it is because a trigger set of "slur words" is not allowed, that's one thing. And, even though my personal take is that it is a political/reclamation statement, if there is a bright line, there is a bright line, and I could live with it. If it is because identification of LGBTQ culture is not allowed, that's another thing entirely.

To me, the most interesting question is this: how many different turnstile employees at Dollywood would have made the same call, and why or why not? Or, put another way, how clear is the "is/is not" distinction made in training, and how much discretion does an individual employee have to make that decision? This is one of those places that, if *I* were HFEC, I'd want a very clear policy in place of what is/is not offensive, with relatively little room for discretion on the part of a low-level park employee at the gate.

Lord Gonchar said:
I can't strut around with a "My Wife Married A Big Dick" on my shirt and claim that it's ok because I have a dick, it's just an ironic statement and that it's family friendly because I have a family.

At CP, employees could wear shirts that say, "I work for Dick," and that would be super funny.

maXairMike said:
Dollywood is in the middle of the Bible Belt and has a Gospel Music Museum for crying out loud.

Irrelevant. My God doesn't hate gay people.

Come to think of it, a lot of the angles being brought up aren't relevant. The truth is, the park can tell you what you can and can't wear, and I'm all for that. I suspect the woman agrees since she complied with the request.

The real issue here, the one that makes this newsworthy, is the "family friendly" comment by the employee. That's where the screw-up occurred. To a degree, the statement by the park's PR person about welcoming families of all shapes and sizes is a start, but what someone needs to do is apologize to the couple. Beyond that, it's just media fodder.

If you want to go to an amusement park, go to an amusement park.

If you want to go to a political rally, go to a political rally.

That shirt would be more appropriate for a political rally. Just go to the amusement park, have fun and quit waiving your flags. Flag-waiving, in your face actually makes more people anti-gay.

Same would apply for some holy-roller wearing a pro-marriage t-shirt IMO. That turns people in the other direction because it is in-your-face.

There is a time an place for trying to force your agenda, and Dollywood is not it!

Fortunately for the progress of this nation over the last 200 years, it isn't that simple.

Jeff said:
The real issue here, the one that makes this newsworthy, is the "family friendly" comment by the employee. That's where the screw-up occurred. To a degree, the statement by the park's PR person about welcoming families of all shapes and sizes is a start, but what someone needs to do is apologize to the couple. Beyond that, it's just media fodder.

I still think that depends on the intent of the family friendly comment. You seem close-minded to the idea that it might have been offered as support for the LGBTQA community.

Jeff said:

maXairMike said:
Dollywood is in the middle of the Bible Belt and has a Gospel Music Museum for crying out loud.

Irrelevant. My God doesn't hate gay people.

Putting aside how you know with any certainty whether that is the case, why is your god the only one that matters and not any of the various other views of god that have different positions on the issue?

And I think it is very much relevant. I would expect a christian theme park to have a much different view of the t-shirt at issue than one outside San Francisco. And other parks will fall somewhere in between on the spectrum.

There is a time an place for trying to force your agenda, and Dollywood is not it!

On Saturday at Kings Island, I saw many groups of folks from different churches wearing matching t-shirts with various statements about god. Were they trying to force their agenda?

I can't strut around with a "My Wife Married A Big Dick" on my shirt and claim that it's ok because I have a dick, it's just an ironic statement and that it's family friendly because I have a family.

I don't think this comparison works, on two levels. First, "Dick" is not a slur used to target a particular community. Second, the word "family" isn't a flashpoint here as it is in the various debates about what marriage should and should not be.

I still think that depends on the intent of the family friendly comment.

I'll play the odds here that "family" was not used in the Sister Sledge sense. I suppose it could have been, but I'm going to bet "probably not."

Brian Noble said:

I don't think this comparison works, on two levels. First, "Dick" is not a slur used to target a particular community.

As a member of the jerk community, I take offense to that. :)

Second, the word "family" isn't a flashpoint here as it is in the various debates about what marriage should and should not be.

I'll play the odds here that "family" was not used in the Sister Sledge sense. I suppose it could have been, but I'm going to bet "probably not."

And I think harping on the 'family' comment is all nitpicky overanalyzing. I resubmit an earlier comment to the table:

"Anyone actually look at Dollywood's dress guidelines?

Not that it really adds much, but there it is in black & white.

I think the big question is what constitutes a 'family atmosphere'?

I would suspect that while the term may be outdated - and certainly a 'shades of grey' judgement call - we all know what they mean. Let's not get hung up on the semantics of it."

And I stand by that. The terms 'family friendly' 'Dollywoodrific' 'super duper nice' 'G-rated' 'non-offensive to the lowest common denomonator' 'middle of the road boring and lame' all imply the same thing. It doesn't matter what you call it.

Making the use of a term including the word family a flashpoint, as you put it, is looking for trouble where clearly none was intended.

Brian Noble said:
I'll play the odds here that "family" was not used in the Sister Sledge sense. I suppose it could have been, but I'm going to bet "probably not."

LOL, one of my gay friends that doesn't know me QUITE so well tried to "educate" me on that *other* use of the hot-button word "family" only a few months ago....only to have another gay friend "straighten him out", so to speak (as in, "Gator's well aware of our slang"). I was rolling... :)

I know I'm about 5 pages late here, but ...

djDaemon said:
Of the relative many GLBT people I know, not one of them finds the word "gay" offensive.

So, if your GLBT friends are walking down the street, and over hear one teenager tell another to "stop being so gay" - are you saying they wouldn't find that to be offensive?

Maybe it's not considered as bad as f*g or n****r, but in that context, the word gay is clearly being used as a derogatory slur.

How about "Save Swordfighting for Marriage." Maybe that would be more acceptable. I was trying to think of something to do with carpet, but that could go either way.

I think the point Jeff is trying to make is that where the park is and what the religious sentiments of its patrons are is completely and totally unrelated to whether the shirt was in lines with the dress code or not.

And also (as gay friendly Christian pastor), thanks to LK for pointing out:

LostKause said:
Gay people can still be Christians. Some Christian sects will try to make gays an enemy of Christianity, but Gays are just the exact people that Jesus would be best friends with.

I think that the Westburro wackjobs have totally messed up what the religion is all about. Like many religions, there are two sides to the Christian religion.

A lot more than 2. ;)

Back on topic:
The issue as I see it is whether the "not family friendly" comment meant:

Either
a1) A shirt advocating any political or social stance at all is not family friendly. (i.e. would they disallow a shirt that said, "<some position about> the Death Penalty!")

a2) A shirt advocating a specific political or social stance that they disagree with is not family friendly. (i.e. would they allow 'Stop the Death Penalty!' but not allow 'Continue the Death Penalty!' "because the death penalty ruins families" or vice versa)

or

b) A shirt that had an offensive phrasing, no matter how cleverly ironic, is not family friendly. (i.e. would they disallow a shirt that said, "Twilight is so gay.")

I tend to think it was b) more than a1) or a2).

WOW everyone's coming out of the closet on this thread :-) I had no idea there were so many on here - but maybe it's just a percentage of the masses.

Jeff - make sure you have a Cosmo Bar at the next outing - and none of that cheap stuff - we like top shelf mostly :-)

So you're a top?

super7* said:
If you want to go to an amusement park, go to an amusement park.

If you want to go to a political rally, go to a political rally.

That shirt would be more appropriate for a political rally. Just go to the amusement park, have fun and quit waiving your flags. Flag-waiving, in your face actually makes more people anti-gay.

Same would apply for some holy-roller wearing a pro-marriage t-shirt IMO. That turns people in the other direction because it is in-your-face.

There is a time an place for trying to force your agenda, and Dollywood is not it!

Totally agree with you however in this day and age so so many people make EVERYTHING politcal. Just last night at Kroger I saw a guy walking around in the store wearing a t-shirt with the words NO-BAMA above a pic of President Obama lying in the gutter with his wrists cut. I know one of the managers of that Kroger and I asked him since that shirt was clearly offensive why doesn't management make that guy turn his shirt inside out only to get "..it is against Kroger policy to make such a request as they want to make a sale..".

Come to think of it it seems only amusement parks, malls and beaches do this sort of thing as in rules as what one can/can't wear. Other public places such as retail stores, bars & restaurants, hotels/motels..etc..etc...really don't care how offensive one's t-shirt really is.

Apollo - I prefer not to advertise that on here LOL PM me.