1

How Did Hollywood Get So ‘Woke’?

Why do so many members of the Hollywood elite espouse such radical, leftist causes? Why are they so pro-abortion, so pro-queer activism? Why are they so passionate about saving trees and caring for cows? How and why did Hollywood become so “woke”?After [this year’s] Oscars, the Daily Mail ran this lengthy headline: “And the award for the most self-righteous Oscars acceptance speech goes to . . . Joaquin Phoenix lectures about animal rights, Brad Pitt slams impeachment trial and Obama documentary director urges ‘workers of the world to unite.’”

What? “Joaquin Phoenix launched a passionate speech about animal rights, veganism and Speciesism” while the director of an Obama documentary quoted Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto? The elite, the mega-rich, and the powerful called for the uprising of the oppressed working class?

Other tag lines in the Mail included:

  • Hair Love creator Matthew Cherry advocated for the Crown Act, a California law that prohibits discrimination based on hair style or texture, in his speech
  • American Factory co-director Julia Reichert – who is fighting terminal cancer – quoted from the Communist Manifesto
  • Janelle Monae opened the show by declaring herself a ‘proud’, ‘black queer artist telling stories’
  • Sigourney Weaver declared: ‘All women are superheroes’ when she presented an award

Yes, Hollywood has been “woke” for many years now, fashioning itself to be the prophetic voice of conscience. And, the truth be told, many in Hollywood are passionate about their causes, from animal rights to climate change, and from same-sex “marriage” to immigration.

In other words, for many of them (if not most; only God knows), this is not just a show. They truly believe they are in the right. They truly believe conservative religion is damaging people’s lives. They truly believe we are destroying the planet.

To quote Joaquin Phoenix at length,

“I think whether we’re talking about gender and equality, or racism, or queer rights, or indigenous rights, or animal rights, we’re talking about the fight against injustice. We’re talking about the fight against the belief that one people, one race, one gender, one species has the right to dominate, control, use, and exploit another with impunity.”

Not only so, but, “We go into the natural world and plunder it of its resources. We feel entitled to artificially inseminate a cow and then steal her baby, even though her cries of anguish are unmistakable.”

So, pity the poor baby cow (after all, it is a living creature), but rip those human clumps of cells out of their mother’s wombs. This is the hypocrisy of Hollywood.

But this doesn’t answer two fundamental questions. First, why is this segment of the population so outspoken about social and political issues? Why do they claim to care so much? Second, why have they taken up positions on the extreme left with issue after issue?

Obviously, we can only speak in general terms, since Hollywood is not a monolith. But perhaps the answer to the first question is simply this: Everyone in Hollywood is involved with producing movies. Most movies carry a message. So, the people involved see themselves as messengers.

The editor of a major newspaper once told me that many journalists see themselves as having a prophetic role. They do not just report the news. They challenge injustice. They seek to correct wrongs. Consequently, some of their writing will reflect a particular bias.

Perhaps, in the same way, as actors play certain roles and screenwriters produce the scripts and directors oversee the process, they feel they are playing a prophetic role in the society. They are telling stories that need to be told. They are making social statements. Consequently, they themselves have something to say. (For my response to this, see here.)

But how, then, did their message become so slanted? Why a quotation from Karl Marx? Why the concern about inseminating a cow?

This, in my view, is the result of taking up causes from a me-centered perspective. (I would say “man-centered,” but that uses the dreaded “m” word. To say “human-centered” doesn’t seem to cut it as well.) In other words, rather than seeing things from God’s perspective, they see things from an earthly perspective.

So, rather than see the meaning of marriage as God intended it for human flourishing and the well-being of society, they see the “injustice” of two women not being allowed to marry.

That also means that see animals as equal to humans (since humans are not uniquely created in the image of God). They even see trees as equal to humans (and even better than humans, since trees are noble creatures that never hurt anyone).

As to how these views became so dominant in Hollywood, this would seem to reflect a process similar to that in our universities. Specifically, after the counterculture shift of the 1960s, an increasing number of leftist intellectuals and artists and cultural influencers rose to the top. And they now hold positions of dominance, effectively silencing and suppressing those who dissent.

Interestingly, though, many “common people” – the proletariat, if you will – are not having it. As the Mail also reported, “while the well-heeled crowd at the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles applauded their speeches, their ‘lectures’ nauseated the audience at home.

“Many viewers took to Twitter to slam the stars as ‘hypocrites’ and called the event the ‘wokest Oscars ever’.”

Perhaps a little too “woke” for the tastes of many?

Personally, I can appreciate how gifted many of these actors and writers and cinematographers and directors are.

I can appreciate the sacrifices some of them make for their trade (in other words, their riches come with a price).

I can even appreciate their concern for the environment (within reason) and their compassion for animals (again, within reason).

But when wokeness means quoting Marx, celebrating queerness, and caring more for baby cows than for baby humans, then I have a simple message. Hollywood, you need a spiritual awakening. You are not yet truly woke.


This article was originally published at AskDrBrown.org.



Thoughts on Troubling Cultural Miscellanea

Episcopal Church

The Episcopal Church has lost its collective theological mind. On Monday, July 9, 2012, the Episcopal Church General Convention voted to add the terms “gender identity and expression” to its anti-discrimination canon. That’s seems at minimum  odd because God clearly discriminates against cross-dressing.

What this means is that those who choose elective body mutilation (i.e., “sex reassignment surgery”) and cross-dressing can be ordained within the Episcopal church. Those who reject the sex that God has assigned them and who reject Scripture on cross-dressing and marriage and church leadership will now be teaching in churches.

Ironies abound, including the tragic irony that while Christ beckons children to come to Him, “trans-inclusive” Episcopalians will make church a place where children should not go.

Barney Frank

The arrogant U.S. Representative Barney Frank now has the dubious distinction of being the first member of Congress in the history of the United States to “marry” someone of his own sex. Frank also has the dubious distinction of having been reprimanded by the U.S. House of Representatives for fixing 33 parking tickets for the male prostitute whom Frank hired and housed in his home.

Frank recently pouted in an interview that none of his Republican colleagues had publicly congratulated him on his nuptials. He acknowledged private kudos from a few Republicans and hearty congrats from many Dems. Shame on anyone for congratulating Franks for his participation in a sham marriage that contributes to the further erosion of the institution that stands at the center of civilized public life.

Penguin Sexual Antics

The BBC is reporting  that a detailed account of the sexual activities of adelie penguins written by biologist George Murray Levick, who was part of Captain Scott’s expedition to the South Pole in 1910, has just been made public. This report reveals that adelie penguins were seen engaging in “sexual coercion, sexual and physical abuse of chicks, non-procreative sex,” sex with penguin corpses, and homosexual acts.

Much ink has been spilled about the children’s picture book And Tango Makes Three, which tells the heartwarming tale of purportedly homosexual penguins Roy and Silo who hatched a chick together.  They were deemed homosexual despite the fact that no one ever saw them engaged in sex.

Much less ink has been spilled—at least in the mainstream press—about the end of this saga. The purportedly homosexual Silo jubilantly celebrated by homosexual activists is now ex-gay, having been transformed by the alluring female Scrappy who sashayed into his life.

The larger question that Levick’s South Pole account brings into focus is, should we really be looking to the animal kingdom for our ideas about human morality?

And let’s pray that there are no picture books based on the penguin antics described by Dr. Levick.

Pride Parades

Parents who take their children to parades that celebrate deviant sexuality (aka “gay pride” parades) with obscene public behavior demonstrate their unworthiness to be parents. Americans for Truth has provided a glimpse into the sordid world of “pride” parades with photos from the recent sorry spectacle in Philadelphia which children of all ages not only attended but participated in.

What kind of government leaders permit and participate in such sickening public displays? What kind of business leaders sponsor and participate in such decadent spectacles? Has their lip-smacking lust for power, position, and money devoured their consciences?

And what kind of darkness clouds the hearts and minds of parents who bring their children to witness such soul-destroying pollution?

Click here to see some of what our business and government leaders think serve the best interests of the Philadelphia community, but be forewarned, it ain’t pretty.

Brad Pitt’s Mom

Jane Pitt deserves our thanks, admiration, and prayers for saying publicly what so few have the courage to say. She sent a letter to her local Springfield, Missouri newspaper in which she stated the unvarnished truth that Barack Obama supports “same sex marriage” and the killing of the unborn.

And how do those who clamor for “equal rights” while denying unborn babies the right to mere existence and who decry name-calling respond to Mrs. Pitt’s respectfully expressed views?  They respond by issuing death threats and hurling hair-curling epithets at Mrs. Pitt. So much for tolerance and diversity.

Please pray for Mrs. Pitt. Pray that God grants her peace, comfort, protection, wisdom, and courage.  And pray that we all, including Mrs. Pitt, remember that Jesus said, “you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.”

Family “Diversity”

The notion that no one should ever feel bad about their behavior or the behavior of loved ones has proven to be a cultural toxin. In the service of non-discriminating non-judgmentalism, we now have picture books read to children in early elementary school that teach that all family structures are indistinguishable in terms of their inherent goodness. These books proclaim deceitfully that it matters not to the welfare of children whether they’re raised by single parents, divorced parents, or homosexual partners.

Silence in public schools on the topic of “diverse family structures” is not an option for “progressive” teachers who view themselves as “agents of change.” And teaching that intact, married heterosexual parents are best for children would be a grotesque injustice to these change agents. Nope, nothing less than affirmation of all structures will do—well, almost all. It will be at least a year or so before affirmation of polyamorous structures will be demanded.

But, if society is prohibited from saying, for example, that unwed single motherhood or divorce are harmful to children because saying so will make children feel bad, how will society discourage unwed single motherhood or divorce?