Phil & Duck Dynasty- UPDATE: A&E Caves

[steff]

Dec 22, 2013 13:38:06 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:35:57 GMT -5 steff said:

What difference does his name make?  Are we now going to classy someone as gay because you've never met a man with their name before?  

I don't think he classified them as gay because if his name....I'm pretty sure the fact that they had a gay marriage is what classifies them as gay

Then why even question the man's name? 

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 13:30:35 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:29:30 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I don't know how to post links, but I just read an article from the Huffington Post saying Phil Robertson will be in the new episodes of Duck Dynasty starting January 15.   The article also states A & E will air a Duck Dynasty marathon on 12/22/13.  I don't know how reputable the Hoff Post is, but the article was posted yesterday.

They've already filmed episodes with him in it.

From what I've read, they'll air the 9 episodes already filmed and won't film more with him for an undefined amount of time.  He's on hiatus.

[Value Buy]

Dec 22, 2013 13:35:57 GMT -5 steff said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:33:04 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Forgive my ignorance, but Aubrey is a man's name?

Always thought it was a female name.

Did he change it legally, or was he given that name at birth by his parents, or did he legally change it?

What difference does his name make?  Are we now going to classy someone as gay because you've never met a man with their name before?  

No Steff, quit trying to label me.

It was a simple serious question.

And is classy a word for "classify"?

And since you asked the question of me, did he legally change his name to Aubrey?

I do not pretend to understand the homosexual lifestyle.

I accept it as a fact of life around the world.

I also understand it may not get one thru the Pearly Gates, but then who knows?

I know I do not have that answer and neither do you since we know your feelings on organized religion.

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 13:41:50 GMT -5 steff said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:38:06 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

I don't think he classified them as gay because if his name....I'm pretty sure the fact that they had a gay marriage is what classifies them as gay

Then why even question the man's name? 

MT didn't question his name.  Value Buy did.  MT's response spoke to Value Buy's post.

[Value Buy]

Dec 22, 2013 13:39:22 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:33:04 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Forgive my ignorance, but Aubrey is a man's name?

Always thought it was a female name.

Did he change it legally, or was he given that name at birth by his parents, or did he legally change it?

"Of French origin, Aubrey results from the phonetical mutation of Alberic, which is a Germanic given name, meaning "Fair Ruler of the Little People", or "King of the Elves".[1] The name Alberich is the German variant. The Anglo-Saxons used before the Norman conquest the corresponding variant Ælf-rīc (see Ælfric).
A female form is recorded as Aubrée and does not share the same etymology. It is derived from the Germanic Albereda or Alberada. It can be found in certain genealogies of the noble Norman families (See f. e. Aubrey of Buonalbergo).
The name is traditionally male, but is more commonly used as a feminine name in the United States. It was the 41st most popular name given to girls born in the United States in 2009.[2] It was last ranked among the top 1,000 most common names for boys in the United States in 2002. It was the 479th most common name for all males in the United States in the 1990 census.[3]"

Wikipedia

thank you.

Learned something today!

[steff]

And since you asked the question of me, did he legally change his name to Aubrey?

If it was his given name or he changed it, why does it matter?  What impact is the fact that his name is Aubrey having on the discussion or gay marriage?

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 13:45:05 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:39:22 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

"Of French origin, Aubrey results from the phonetical mutation of Alberic, which is a Germanic given name, meaning "Fair Ruler of the Little People", or "King of the Elves".[1] The name Alberich is the German variant. The Anglo-Saxons used before the Norman conquest the corresponding variant Ælf-rīc (see Ælfric).
A female form is recorded as Aubrée and does not share the same etymology. It is derived from the Germanic Albereda or Alberada. It can be found in certain genealogies of the noble Norman families (See f. e. Aubrey of Buonalbergo).
The name is traditionally male, but is more commonly used as a feminine name in the United States. It was the 41st most popular name given to girls born in the United States in 2009.[2] It was last ranked among the top 1,000 most common names for boys in the United States in 2002. It was the 479th most common name for all males in the United States in the 1990 census.[3]"

Wikipedia

thank you.

Learned something today!

What can I say?  I'm a "look it up" freak! 
You're welcome.

[justme]

Dec 22, 2013 13:31:24 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place!

Especially since the rest of the family has already said they're not filming any episodes without him. So A&E now either has to lift the suspension or say bye-bye to DD. They'd still be under contract so couldn't switch to another channel, but depending on the contract they might be able to wait it out and switch once the contract is done?

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 22, 2013 13:53:09 GMT -5 justme said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:31:24 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place!

Especially since the rest of the family has already said they're not filming any episodes without him. So A&E now either has to lift the suspension or say bye-bye to DD. They'd still be under contract so couldn't switch to another channel, but depending on the contract they might be able to wait it out and switch once the contract is done?

And from what I have read about the family (just recently since I didn't know a thing about them until this hoopla), family is very important to them. I hope they all band together. If they do, then it will get really interesting and will show who has the upper hand.

[Deleted]

It will be interesting. 

If the family refuses to do the show, are they in breach of contract? 

Eta. I guess we'd have to be privy to the contract to know.... 

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 22, 2013 14:01:05 GMT -5 oped said:

It will be interesting. 

If the family refuses to do the show, are they in breach of contract? 

Eta. I guess we'd have to be privy to the contract to know.... 

I don't know.

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 13:53:09 GMT -5 justme said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:31:24 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place!

Especially since the rest of the family has already said they're not filming any episodes without him. So A&E now either has to lift the suspension or say bye-bye to DD. They'd still be under contract so couldn't switch to another channel, but depending on the contract they might be able to wait it out and switch once the contract is done?

The following is all I've seen with regard to what the rest of the family is doing about this issue, justme.  I don't see anything that says they're not filming.  I see they say they "can't imagine filming" without Phil, but not that they will definitely not continue.  They're discussing it with A&E, apparently, and contractual obligations will be a part of that discussion.  Not knowing what their contract states, we can't know what the result of the discussion will be.

“We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate. We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right. We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.“

Entertainment Weekly

[Tennesseer]

Dec 22, 2013 13:45:05 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:39:22 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

"Of French origin, Aubrey results from the phonetical mutation of Alberic, which is a Germanic given name, meaning "Fair Ruler of the Little People", or "King of the Elves".[1] The name Alberich is the German variant. The Anglo-Saxons used before the Norman conquest the corresponding variant Ælf-rīc (see Ælfric).
A female form is recorded as Aubrée and does not share the same etymology. It is derived from the Germanic Albereda or Alberada. It can be found in certain genealogies of the noble Norman families (See f. e. Aubrey of Buonalbergo).
The name is traditionally male, but is more commonly used as a feminine name in the United States. It was the 41st most popular name given to girls born in the United States in 2009.[2] It was last ranked among the top 1,000 most common names for boys in the United States in 2002. It was the 479th most common name for all males in the United States in the 1990 census.[3]"

Wikipedia

thank you.

Learned something today!

VB-the first name of Sydney is used for men and women too.

[justme]

Dec 22, 2013 14:06:42 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Dec 22, 2013 13:53:09 GMT -5 justme said:

Especially since the rest of the family has already said they're not filming any episodes without him. So A&E now either has to lift the suspension or say bye-bye to DD. They'd still be under contract so couldn't switch to another channel, but depending on the contract they might be able to wait it out and switch once the contract is done?

The following is all I've seen with regard to what the rest of the family is doing about this issue, justme.  I don't see anything that says they're not filming.  I see they say they "can't imagine filming" without Phil, but not that they will definitely not continue.  They're discussing it with A&E, apparently, and contractual obligations will be a part of that discussion.  Not knowing what their contract states, we can't know what the result of the discussion will be.

“We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate. We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right. We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.“

Entertainment Weekly

I see the "can't imagine" as basically the only way they would is if they had to contractually, which I doubt, especially since they're seeing what not imagining going forward without him means to the show. Considering based on the GQ article they had it written into their contract that betraying anyone in the family, I would think they see going on without him as betraying him.

During the family’s initial negotiations about the show with A&E, Jase told me, “the three no-compromises were faith, betrayal of family members, and duck season.”

Read More www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2oEUlKuvn

I also am remembering a twitter from one of the females on the show read on an entertainment TV show that alluded more clearly then "can't imagine", but I don't know the people and couldn't find the tweet.

[Miss Tequila]

Cracker Barrel just folded. They posted they were "flat out wrong". The article went on to say they took the duck dynasty merchandise off the shelf so as not to offend their gay customers but offended lots if customers but doing this. I can't post links from my phone so I'm hoping one of you will post it for me....I found the link on foxnews.com...I promise, you won't catch anything by going there :-p

This makes me smile :-)

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 14:20:33 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Cracker Barrel just folded. They posted they were "flat out wrong". The article went on to say they took the duck dynasty merchandise off the shelf so as not to offend their gay customers but offended lots if customers but doing this. I can't post links from my phone so I'm hoping one of you will post it for me....I found the link on foxnews.com...I promise, you won't catch anything by going there :-p

This makes me smile :-)

Here you go, MT.  Found it on ABC, as well.  

ABC News

[justme]

An ABC link so no one here burst into flames going to Fox News

abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/cracker-barrel-pulling-duck-dynasty-items-off-shelves/story?id=21302746

[mmhmm]

I see the "can't imagine" as basically the only way they would is if they had to contractually, which I doubt, especially since they're seeing what not imagining going forward without him means to the show. Considering based on the GQ article they had it written into their contract that betraying anyone in the family, I would think they see going on without him as betraying him.

This would be a matter for the legal eagles to decide, justme.  There's no way we can surmise what's in that contract; nor, can we surmise what the legal ramifications of the contract might be.  How the family sees it doesn't change the law, and we don't know what else is in that contract at the insistence of A&E.

[Miss Tequila]

Lol! Thanks for posting the links...and I am lol that you avoided foxnews :-p

[justme]

Dec 22, 2013 14:32:54 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I see the "can't imagine" as basically the only way they would is if they had to contractually, which I doubt, especially since they're seeing what not imagining going forward without him means to the show. Considering based on the GQ article they had it written into their contract that betraying anyone in the family, I would think they see going on without him as betraying him.

This would be a matter for the legal eagles to decide, justme.  There's no way we can surmise what's in that contract; nor, can we surmise what the legal ramifications of the contract might be.  How the family sees it doesn't change the law, and we don't know what else is in that contract at the insistence of A&E.

True, I only know what they said not the actual contract. I just think that based on everything they've said they're not going to film without Phil. So the question is, does A&E back down or do they just play the few shows they have (not sure if the season premiering on Jan 15 is completed filming) and cancel the whole thing. I wouldn't think there's a way to force them to film without him.

[Tennesseer]

Hopefully Cracker Barrel is restocking their Duck Dynasty Chia Pets.

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 14:36:21 GMT -5 justme said:

Dec 22, 2013 14:32:54 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

This would be a matter for the legal eagles to decide, justme.  There's no way we can surmise what's in that contract; nor, can we surmise what the legal ramifications of the contract might be.  How the family sees it doesn't change the law, and we don't know what else is in that contract at the insistence of A&E.

True, I only know what they said not the actual contract. I just think that based on everything they've said they're not going to film without Phil. So the question is, does A&E back down or do they just play the few shows they have (not sure if the season premiering on Jan 15 is completed filming) and cancel the whole thing. I wouldn't think there's a way to force them to film without him.

We'll have to wait and see what the outcome of all this is.  I'm not going to second-guess the family, A&E, or the legalities contained in a contract I haven't read.  If the contract contains any sort of language that would allow A&E to suspend Mr. Robertson for, for instance, damaging the public image they wish to maintain, it may be found they are legally able to suspend him and the rest of the cast must continue filming (if that's what A&E decides to do), or quit and pay off their contract.  We don't have access to the most important part of this whole decision-making process - the contract.

[mmhmm]

Dec 22, 2013 14:34:09 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Lol! Thanks for posting the links...and I am lol that you avoided foxnews :-p

I'm here to help.

[steff]

Dec 22, 2013 14:40:05 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Hopefully Cracker Barrel is restocking their Duck Dynasty Chia Pets.

My kiddo was going to buy one as his Secret Santa joke gift, but changed his mind after all of this bs.   He picked $$ toilet paper instead. 

[thyme4change]

1)  I have to admit, I googled the couple to see if it was two guys or two women.  Had I seen their name in another context, I would have assumed Aubrey was female - only because I know two female Aubreys - both spelled that way.  I know several Danis who are female, but no Dannys, so I was a little curious.

2)  It doesn't really matter what happens now.  Generally when a show as dumb as Duck Dynasty goes through a scandal like this, it loses its shine.  They can keep him on, or take him off - either way it will have a tension about the statement, and they will either address it - which they can't resolve, because some people agree with him, and others don't.  Or they won't address it, and it will seem like they are ignoring an elephant in the room, which will feel forced and lame.  These shows are usually brain candy, total escapes from whatever we have going on.  Bringing in two of the biggest hot button topics into the show destroys that.  It ruins the fun and enjoyment of the silliness and turns the show into something you feel like you have to have an important opinion on, a moral perspective.  Nobody wants that from this show.

[swamp]

Dec 22, 2013 14:20:33 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Cracker Barrel just folded. They posted they were "flat out wrong". The article went on to say they took the duck dynasty merchandise off the shelf so as not to offend their gay customers but offended lots if customers but doing this. I can't post links from my phone so I'm hoping one of you will post it for me....I found the link on foxnews.com...I promise, you won't catch anything by going there :-p

This makes me smile :-)

Cracker Barrel was being ridiculous. We all know gay people don't go there because the food sucks. 

[Green Eyed Lady]

Just once, tho, I'd like someone to take a stand based on what they feel is right - and stick to it - whichever side that may fall on.  Just once, I'd like to see something NOT come down to who screams the loudest.

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 22, 2013 14:45:32 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

1)  I have to admit, I googled the couple to see if it was two guys or two women.  Had I seen their name in another context, I would have assumed Aubrey was female - only because I know two female Aubreys - both spelled that way.  I know several Danis who are female, but no Dannys, so I was a little curious.

2)  It doesn't really matter what happens now.  Generally when a show as dumb as Duck Dynasty goes through a scandal like this, it loses its shine.  They can keep him on, or take him off - either way it will have a tension about the statement, and they will either address it - which they can't resolve, because some people agree with him, and others don't.  Or they won't address it, and it will seem like they are ignoring an elephant in the room, which will feel forced and lame.  These shows are usually brain candy, total escapes from whatever we have going on.  Bringing in two of the biggest hot button topics into the show destroys that.  It ruins the fun and enjoyment of the silliness and turns the show into something you feel like you have to have an important opinion on, a moral perspective.  Nobody wants that from this show.

Or they might pick up new viewers because of the scandal. I've never seen the show and never would have considered watching it before...now I am going to watch it to see what it is about. I will probably lose interest after an episode but maybe not.

I can assure you I would never buy any duck dynasty related!

[Green Eyed Lady]

I have a Duck Dynasty sweatshirt.  I wore it grocery shopping on Friday afternoon before I'd had a chance to see any news.  I now get why people were throwing malevolent glances my way!

[Tennesseer]

Dec 22, 2013 14:53:30 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Dec 22, 2013 14:45:32 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

1)  I have to admit, I googled the couple to see if it was two guys or two women.  Had I seen their name in another context, I would have assumed Aubrey was female - only because I know two female Aubreys - both spelled that way.  I know several Danis who are female, but no Dannys, so I was a little curious.

2)  It doesn't really matter what happens now.  Generally when a show as dumb as Duck Dynasty goes through a scandal like this, it loses its shine.  They can keep him on, or take him off - either way it will have a tension about the statement, and they will either address it - which they can't resolve, because some people agree with him, and others don't.  Or they won't address it, and it will seem like they are ignoring an elephant in the room, which will feel forced and lame.  These shows are usually brain candy, total escapes from whatever we have going on.  Bringing in two of the biggest hot button topics into the show destroys that.  It ruins the fun and enjoyment of the silliness and turns the show into something you feel like you have to have an important opinion on, a moral perspective.  Nobody wants that from this show.

Or they might pick up new viewers because of the scandal. I've never seen the show and never would have considered watching it before...now I am going to watch it to see what it is about. I will probably lose interest after an episode but maybe not.

I can assure you I would never buy any duck dynasty related!

If ìt turns out you like Duck Dynasty, may I recommend Swamp People on the History Channel?