Charlie Kirk- Putting The "Fun" in "Fundamentalist"
It sounds as if someone's a wee bit sexually frustrated
Turning Points USA president Charlie Kirk was ridiculed online Sunday after expressing his displeasure with the Super Bowl halftime show.
Among the things that unfolded was rapper Eminem refusing to abide by the NFL's demand that he not kneel in acknowledgment of the civil disobedience protest started by former NFL player Colin Kaepernick.
But for Kirk, it was the display of scantily clad women that appeared to trigger the far-right activist.
"The NFL is now the league of sexual anarchy. This halftime show should not be allowed on television," he ranted.
I made a point of not watching the Super Bowl halftime show, not because I have a probably with scantily-clad women or “sexual anarchy,” but because I have an enduring dislike of rap and hip-hop music. I admire the talent it takes to create the music, but I dislike the music itself. It’s just a matter of personal preference. So I have no frame of reference for why Charlie Kirk has his panties in a wad, but whatever it was sure had him all hot and bothered.
I’m not even sure what “sexual anarchy” refers to, at least by Kirk’s definition- perhaps anything other than the missionary position and 30 seconds of fast and furious sexual congress? But, whatever it is he’s railing against, I’m guessing he’s more than a wee bit repressed. It sounds like someone never learned that sex is supposed to be fun, a joyful experience shared with another consenting adult- or adults, depending on what sorts of things float your boat.
I know there are those who, like Charlie Kirk, who would love to turn the NFL into the “No Fun League” and limit Super Bowl halftime shows to a half-dozen old men playing chess in Gramercy Park. Church choirs would provide any musical accompaniment, and women would not be allowed to dance. If this sounds like something straight out of the American Taliban playbook, that’s because it is, and Charlie Kirk has appointed himself Grand Mullah.
It’s one thing if Kirk finds the choice of entertainment offensive. That’s his choice and his prerogative. Then again, I can’t imagine that anyone was holding a gun to his head and forcing him to watch the halftime show. He could’ve done what I did- go into the kitchen and spend halftime making pizza. Then, when the halftime show was over, he could’ve gone back to the game with pizza and his sense of moral propriety intact.
See? Everybody wins!
I strongly dislike rap and hip-hop, so I excused myself and went into the kitchen to make pizza. I didn’t whine or complain because I knew that some folks would enjoy the show. I chose to remove myself out of personal preference. It wasn’t a big deal. Charlie Kirk could’ve saved himself a lot of heartburn if he’d done the same thing.
As for the NFL now being “the league of sexual anarchy,” what does that even mean? Is that a catch-all for everything Kirk finds dirty, nasty, or titillating? Must we rid ourselves of everything that gives him an unwanted boner (does that mean “Friday Night RAW” is verboten?)? Does he view every sexually fantastical thought that doesn’t involve his wife as a grievous sin? Is he so sexually repressed that the sight of women dancing means he needs to change his shorts?
Why is he so uptight? And what makes him believe that he has the right to dictate sexual mores to the rest of us who don’t share his narrow, repressed sexuality? At 28, you’d think he’s way too young to be that uptight about anything sexual- and yet….
Many folks are wondering why Kirk has his knickers in a twist. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) even called him, with good reason, “a weirdo.” That’s as good an explanation as anything else I’ve heard.
As far as I know, there was no “wardrobe malfunction.” No one fell out of their costume and flashed their breast to America and the world. Sure, there may have been “scantily-clad” women dancing, but that’s hardly newsworthy. You see that almost anywhere these days. Whether it’s appropriate or not is difficult to say, but I sure as Hell don’t want Charlie Kirk being the one to dictate that decision to me.
If Kirk was offended by the halftime show, he could’ve turned off his TV and walked away. No one was forcing him to watch. And while he’s certainly free to express his opinion, I’m equally free to ridicule him for being such a gawdawful prude at such a young age.
Or perhaps this was all just a weak attempt at ginning up yet more White grievances?
It sounds like someone needs to lighten up, no?