161–170 of 514 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
it's possible to disagree with someone politically and still acknowledge their positive aspects.
from his instagram for his last birthday ( https://www.instagram.com/p/DVtiSHbETbX/ ) I don’t age. I level up. I’m 86 today! Nothing like some playful action on a sunny day to make you feel young. I’m grateful for another year, good health and the chance to keep doing what I love. Thank you all for being the best fans in the world. Your support through the years has meant more to me than you’ll ever know. God Bless,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was openly maga and a homophobe and a transphobe. I wouldn’t consider these qualities for a role model.
Many like myself did not know this as a kid in the 80s-90s. Some of the movies he made like "sidekicks" left a positive impression at that age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
it's possible to disagree with someone politically and still acknowledge their positive aspects.
There was a period of like 2 years when I was a kid where chuck Norris jokes were all the rage on the playground and I made an iPhone app that listed them all. Jokes like “Chuck Norris is able to slam a revolving door.” Anyway, I “built” this stupid app when I was like 13, copy-pasted like 300 jokes in there and a random one would show every time you tapped the screen. Chuck Norris’s estate blocked the app from going…
This was like 2005-2006
Chuck Norris (and Michael Landon) were golden age role models for young men. Strong but thoughtful, firm but compassionate, and deeply principled but also practical. Yes, these were acting roles but they picked those roles for a reason. Rest in peace, Chuck.
He was openly maga and a homophobe and a transphobe. I wouldn’t consider these qualities for a role model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> put in the policy of “Don’t ask don’t tell” DADT was a significant improvement over the status quo of "we ask, you tell, and then you get dishonorably discharged". Considering it evidence of homophobia is revisionism. Did it go far enough? No. Was it a good step towards where we wanted to go? Yes.
And the Defense of Marriage Act?
Sure doesn't seem like a Clinton issue?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then he said he "picked them for a reason" implying that he chose those characters based on the characteristics he shared with them
Whatever the reason, it wasn't because his characters were "openly maga and a homophobe and a transphobe," because they weren't. Bruce Lee movies and Texas Ranger didn't address those issues at all. And in spite of his flaws, it's possible that he had some good qualities as well, or at least aspired to them. So maybe those other qualities were what he looked for in the characters he played.