And one who wears a toilet seat around his or her neck is likely to be a shithead!

I'm still trying to work out what the significance was of him threatening to shoot that cherry with a brightly colored water pistol the entire time.

What kills me is that self-importance and seriousness. There's got to be some crazy, inflated ego crap going on in his head. I bet callers are warned not to upset his manliness:

You may only question the actions or motives of "The Viking" if you are a "Sexual Millionaire" with hair on your chest.

Pastor Ricky out of Georgetown: a fixture of Austin Community Access TV for quite a while.

Back in law school, I actually called him up (this was before the toilet seat gimmick) because he professed a love for the Beatles "before they got hooked on drugs." I quoted him an interview where they said they were basically speed freaks from the Cavern Days, recorded A Hard Day's Night on Pot and Help! on something stronger.

Therefore, I win.

I was just wondering that myself, Zed, about the man giving his sage advice to the world while pointing a toy gun at a cherry.

Sheesh, what a nutter. I don't think there are enough categories in the DSM-IV for this guy.

Dammit, I just erased my post. Oh well, attempt #2...

1. That's the weirdest thing ever.

2. Moms in pants/sons in skirts is really not that clever, and he is way too proud of it.

3. The first guy calling was questioning what the hell this douchewad was going off about. Does that mean that *normal* people actually pay attention to him? Which leads me to...

4. Is this guy really worth our attention? I mean, most of the stuff posted here is much more consequential than this nut, and it seems like he's way too small of a teeny-tiny-psycho fish to warrant our analysis. On the other hand, I probably would have said the same thing about abusive SM nuts, and then this shows up. So am I wrong? *Should* we bother ourselves with the antics of chaps like this?

Did anyone notice that in the very beginning, he tried to equate homosexuality with child molestation?

These kind of things are great. Seriously. You'll find non-feminists, non-LGB activists will also have no problem laughing at this loser. Then, when one of our leaders mumbles the same tripe, we can all compare them to Mr. Head Injury Toilet Man.

Strategically, promoting this fool is a win win for us.

"Did anyone notice that in the very beginning, he tried to equate homosexuality with child molestation? "

That was the first thing I noticed! First he says feminists turn their sons into homosexuals, then he says he knows two child molestors who grew up in the sort of home he's talking about, as though homosexuals are necessarily child molestors. There might not be studies to back me up, I've never looked into it, but isn't it at least the prevailing notion that child molestors are mostly straight men? (I would go so far as to say straight, white, Christian men.)

In some ways, most ways, I don't think "straight" or "gay" are relevant descriptors when we're talking about child molestors. The most salient thing about child molestors' sexuality is that they think it's all right to inflict it on children; to my mind, the sex of the children is irrelevant.

Apologies, though, because I'm fairly certain that's a tangent.

No, I don't think "straight" or "gay" fully apply, either. I just meant that the way they conduct the part of their lives they want everyone to see tends to fit the straight-WASP-male paradigm. I've never known of one that didn't, in fact.

Concerning the gun and the cherry - he takes them out when he makes his big point that a woman wearing the pants at home makes the sons gay.

Maybe he's trying to visually depict a guy losing his masculinity - i.e. shooting his balls off

(If my subconcious has been working on that all afternoon, then I want that time back.. *sigh*)

I took the gun and the cherry a completely different way, though it had little to do with what was actually being discussed; I kept thinking about an asshat like him violently penetrating a young girl. How else do you prove your manliness, other than violently conquering something fuckable? I mean... real men fuck virgins, right?

Although he *is* wearing a toilet seat around his neck; I suppose it could mean nothing. Or anything.

I watched this video and it's just bewildering. Were the cutaways to the churches in the original broadcast or did the YouTube poster splice them in?

This video, quite simply, makes absolutely no sense. I get that he's *trying* to make a point about feminism and homosexuality, but he never makes an argument. He just states it and then kind of rambles and abuses his callers and then goes on to talk about Miami Vice. As a lawyer, I'm offended at the notion that this qualifies as an "argument" ;)

What's so funny about all this is that I have noticed that a great many women I've met that bully and abuse their husbands aren't even feminists. Does this mean that their sons don't turn out to be gay, just bullys like their mothers?

Okay, now . . . let me get this straight: all feminists are bullies, all bullying does is cause homosexuality, and all homosexualis are child molestors? Whoa. I agree that this clip is probably a lot more effective as comedy than something that anyone will take seriously. I mean, we're listening to a guy with a toilet seat around his head! Is this symbolic of what's inside it? I would really like someone to explain the gun and cherry thing to me too, because I got something similar to Andrea's impression. The way he holds it out is so forced, like he's really tryng to make a statement here. (with a toy gun and a cherry? My head hurts.)

Y'know, Pat Blue, the most power-imbalanced marriage I ever saw--in terms of the woman completely dominating the man, and the man cowering around, deferring to her at all times--was one in which both strongly believed, and went around ranting, that women should not be ordained as clergy because God ordained men as heads of household.

This guy reminds me of that man for some reason. But I do find the cherry/water pistol thing creepy, and the toilet seat doesn't help my impression of his sanity. I guess this is proof that anybody can get on public access television.

Cheers,

TH

There are so many things wrong w/ this that I can't even begin to say.. but... is he trying to say that in a "correct" relationship, that men should "bully and browbeat" their wives? Ok, so let's have all husbands beat their wives and we'll have peace on earth, no homosexuality, and "real men". Sounds great. And another thing, what the hell does being gay have to do w/ bullying? Obviously this idiot has never taken a science class and has no idea what logic, reasoning, argument, research, etc. means. How the hell do people like this get on TV?

Totally bewildering. My favorite part was towards the end, when he's prattling on about homosexuality being bullying, all the while still suspending that cherry and the gun like a damn fool. He doesn't have the foggiest idea what he's talking about, and it's too sad to be funny.