Latest Episode
Play

Go Back   Keith and The Girl Forums Keith and The Girl Forums Show Talk

Show Talk Talk about the show

View Poll Results: Was Keith a homophobe for leaving Matt's place early?
Yes, Keith was homophobic for leaving 9 5.63%
No, Keith was not homophobic for leaving 151 94.38%
Voters: 160. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2009, 08:06 AM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
whatotherway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Luton, UK
Posts: 161
Here is a question to throw out there.

Was Keith, the recipient of an Intentional Tort? I think Matt's room mate definitely planned on an intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), or an assault (sexual) on Keith if he was drunk enough to not know what was going on.

Was Matt guilty of the Tort of negligence, or even a breach of duty, as Matt knew his room mate would push the envelope and did not protect Keith from the situation, which as the person who invited Keith to stay at his property and knowing what his room mate was capable of, he was duly required by law to prevent such an attack on Keith's person?

OR should Keith just punched the room mate in the mouth before he left.

I do not think Keith was homophobic, just because you don't want sex with someone of the same sex, does not mean that you are homophobic, just that you don't want sex with that person.

I think that Keith, did the right thing, left the situation. I wouldn't go back either.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 09:45 AM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Blitzgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 3,294
Keith left before the roommate did anything. I think technically because he touched his arm Keith could have him charged with physical assault because legally you can't put your hands on people when they don't want you to, but I highly doubt he wants to bring that kind of drama into it.

But yeah, if Keith had simply passed out I'm guessing there would've been more touching going on by James. He was correct to just remove himself from the situation.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 10:58 AM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Daemonik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 372
According to the CIA Factbook info on Wikipedia Dominica consists of 90% Blacks, 8% Mulatto (mixed), 2% Caribs (Indigenous Caribbeans) with a total population just under 80,000 people.

Typical of most Caribbean nations Dominica has been swapped between various European colonists and has a mix of French and English. Of course people being people they screwed each other literally and figuratively for decades, so although Tater's might not identify as "black" she's probably a mix of several races leaning strongly towards the African side.

Genetics can express in odd ways and someone's physical appearance does not necessarily correlate to their genetics.
__________________
I'm still alive.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 10:59 AM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
24-hour Marathon 2018 Fundraiser Backer
 
punk'n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 2,238
I would've left. Unwanted sexual advances makes parties no fun.

I was invited to this girl's house that I worked with when I was about 18 or so, for what I thought was just hangin out and listening to music. She gave me beer (which was unusual for me, I was young and didn't drink back then, and it was the middle of the day) and she started showing me pictures of her roomate/boyfriend. He was some sort of DJ and had been recognized in some magazines and stuff, and she was showing me his scrapbook of sorts. Then he came home and before long, it was clear that I was invited over to have a threesome, not just hang out with this girl. I found neither one of them attractive, and I felt lied to, so I bolted. It was awkward working with her long after that. There's no nice way to tell people to fuck off in that situation, just GTFO.
__________________
twitter.com/punkn
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 11:04 AM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Daemonik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 372
After Keith and Chemda's spirited defense of copyright on Friday's show I'm glad to know Extreme will be getting a a royalty check for the use of their song at the end of this episode.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 11:17 AM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Grapist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,260
In Mel Gibson's defense, the joke about alternate endings to the DVD got old before the DVD was even released.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 11:49 AM   #17 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 10
Nazi's and Art

Hitler was an artist who moved to Vienna when he was 18 (1908).

He lived in homeless shelters and under bridges and aspired to become famous for his work.

Many of his companions and fellow artists included Jews.

While there, he applied to the acclaimed Art Academy in Vienna.

He failed the academy's admission test.

Took the test again the next year. Failed.

Since he could not draw/paint portraits, only landscapes, his work was deemed unsatisfactory.

Perhaps this is part of the reason the Nazi's destroyed everyones art?

Who knows what may have happened if Adolf Hitler were accepted.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 12:41 PM   #18 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Cretaceous Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,358
Jesus christ, Nazis are famous for STEALING art, not destroying it. There is still, constantly Nazi-looted art being returned to the descendants of the original owners to this day.

And that, if anything, shows an appreciation for art.

I don't know why Chemda finds it so absurd that anyone who serves in a military that does shitty things is incapable of appreciating art. You are not good or moral for appreciating art, and appreciating art is not limited to the good or the moral. If it were that simple, we could detect murderers simply by showing them art.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 12:53 PM   #19 (permalink)
Member
 
Citizen Derek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 47
The Nazis detested modern art, labeling it "degenerate", and it was banned for being "un-German". They did hold 'degenerate art' and 'degenerate music'
exhibitions, but avant-garde artists were considered enemies of the state and a threat to German culture. A large amount of this 'degenerate art' was destroyed in bonfires, including works by Picasso and Dali. Some Nazi officials even took some for their own private use.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 12:59 PM   #20 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Cretaceous Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citizen Derek View Post
The Nazis detested modern art, labeling it "degenerate", and it was banned for being "un-German". They did hold 'degenerate art' and 'degenerate music'
exhibitions, but avant-garde artists were considered enemies of the state and a threat to German culture. A large amount of this 'degenerate art' was destroyed in bonfires, including works by Picasso and Dali. Some Nazi officials even took some for their own private use.
Yeah, they did destroy some art. They stole more, though, and hating one brand of art does not mean they are incapable of appreciating any.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
Keith and The GirlAd Management plugin by RedTyger