It looks like So You Think You Can Dance discovered it's an entertainment program, and guess what? People don't consider anti-war dances--especially the same dance repeated 10 times--to be entertaining.
As the Webloggin Editor says, who the hell is pro-war? Nobody likes war, but some of us are grown up enough to understand that you have to go to war sometimes. And even if you don't agree with the reasons for the war, grown ups also understand that it's childish and naive to cram your anti-war message down the throats of people who turned on a dance program. After all, if I want to get preached to about peace, I'll just go watch reruns of Cindy Sheehan.
Nigel Lythgoe, the head judge of the show, seemed to be perplexed that viewers protested the anti-war dances.
"Who would’ve dreamt — with the dancers using words like ‘humility,’ ‘love’ and ‘passion’ — that I would be defending a television show that uses words like that?" asks Lythgoe, who also apologized on air.
But at the same time, Lythgoe stood his ground. "Art should be allowed to make statements," he said. "I’m so proud to be part of a show that allows freedom of expression," says (Mia) Michaels. "Nigel has allowed us to be who we are. He never edits us and he lets us express ourselves as artists. I think that is rare and extraordinary."
Of course art should be allowed to make statements. But art doesn't get to make statements without others endorsing or rejecting those statements.
Part of my frustration with the Left in America is that they want consequence-free freedom of expression. There's no guarantee of that in the Constitution. We all get to say lots of things, especially political things, but that doesn't mean there aren't negative consequences when we say things that aren't popular. So, don't choreograph an anti-war dance and then expect the public to applaud it.
But the fun on So You Think You Can Dance didn't end with the anti-war choreography. Choreographer Mia Michaels wore an upside down Marine logo on her jacket that got Marines and their families up in arms.
She had no idea that anyone would be offended by it, she says. She simply thought she was being fashionable by wearing a navy blue military jacket that happened to have a Marine emblem, upside down, on the sleeves. After hearing the feedback, Michaels tried to make amends on the air. "I understand why people were upset and I respect that," she says. "That symbol is sacred to the Marines, it’s what they earned. The problem needed to be addressed and I’m glad we addressed it. That’s why I made a public apology."
Military personnel take their uniforms seriously because virtually every piece is rife with symbolism. Michaels shouldn't have been wearing a Marine uniform in the first place, and to be ignorant of the various symbols is even worse.
But while Michaels apologized for offending Marines, she claims that the protests she received were "hate mail." Puh-lease. Frankly, I'm tired of wimpy liberals demanding that their feelers not get hurt by somebody pointing out their stupidity and insensitivity.
It's just beyond reasonable to expect a person not to wear a military uniform jacket as a fashion statement. And it's also reasonable to not be subjected to anti-war lectures from holier-than-thou choreographers. Let's face it. Without the military fighting the bad guys overseas, I seriously doubt Al Qaeda would support Wade Robson's inane dances, anyway.
Don't expect the anti-war messages to go away, though. Via Webloggin, Matthew Sheffield at Newsbusters has a post about the rash of anti-war movies Hollywood has planned to cram down our throats. Because, hey, they don't need a Fairness Doctrine for the movie industry. Everybody knows it's just entertainment, right?