What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Hypocrisy. Can We Talk? (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
This might be an awful idea. But this is one of the places where I feel like I can talk to this "at scale" and get a good mix of comments. 

And I'm going to come at this from the angle of "both sides". If you're unwilling to go there, this might not be the thread for you.

But here's my question - what do you think it is that seems to completely blind us to our own hypocrisy?

The latest (or many things) I've seen this in my world is with the Super Bowl Halftime show. 

In particular, folks like Franklin Graham who wrote on his Facebook page:

I don’t expect the world to act like the church, but our country has had a sense of moral decency on prime time television in order to protect children. We see that disappearing before our eyes. It was demonstrated tonight in the Pepsi Super Bowl Halftime Show—with millions of children watching. This exhibition was Pepsi showing young girls that sexual exploitation of women is okay. With the exploitation of women on the rise worldwide, instead of lowering the standard, we as a society should be raising it. I’m disappointed in Pepsi and the NFL.
Few public figures have been more supportive of President Trump. 

On the other hand, I've seen people upset about the Stormy Daniels stuff that were silent during Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky issues. 

It seems that we as humans have an unbelievable ability to ignore own hypocrisy. Myself included.

There's also the element of "At what cost?" involved. Franklin Graham is obviously a citizen and can support any president he chooses. The Dixie Chicks can criticize any president they choose. Neither actions happen in a vacuum though. 

I recently observed an interaction where a Christian friend of mine seemed surprised when another Christian friend of mine preferred to keep a distance from Graham. My pro Graham friend is highly intelligent. Yet he seems unable to realize what damage Graham has done to his ability to be taken seriously. 

It just seems baffling to me. 

And was wondering what you thought. I'll dive into more in real life conversations but wanted to ask here. 

And please don't turn this into another partisan thing. We have enough of that. I'm more interested in real discussion about why we as humans seem so unable to see our own hypocrisy. 

 
This might be an awful idea. But this is one of the places where I feel like I can talk to this "at scale" and get a good mix of comments. 

And I'm going to come at this from the angle of "both sides". If you're unwilling to go there, this might not be the thread for you.

But here's my question - what do you think it is that seems to completely blind us to our own hypocrisy?

The latest (or many things) I've seen this in my world is with the Super Bowl Halftime show. 

In particular, folks like Franklin Graham who wrote on his Facebook page:

Few public figures have been more supportive of President Trump. 

On the other hand, I've seen people upset about the Stormy Daniels stuff that were silent during Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky issues. 

It seems that we as humans have an unbelievable ability to ignore own hypocrisy. Myself included.

There's also the element of "At what cost?" involved. Franklin Graham is obviously a citizen and can support any president he chooses. The Dixie Chicks can criticize any president they choose. Neither actions happen in a vacuum though. 

I recently observed an interaction where a Christian friend of mine seemed surprised when another Christian friend of mine preferred to keep a distance from Graham. My pro Graham friend is highly intelligent. Yet he seems unable to realize what damage Graham has done to his ability to be taken seriously. 

It just seems baffling to me. 

And was wondering what you thought. I'll dive into more in real life conversations but wanted to ask here. 

And please don't turn this into another partisan thing. We have enough of that. I'm more interested in real discussion about why we as humans seem so unable to see our own hypocrisy. 
I went to Catholic school and one of the things I was unintentionally taught was to recognize hypocrisy.  For example feed and care for the poor but the Vatican with their billions hoarded all for themselves. Priests not being able to marry was to make sure the church got their assets upon death.  I quit organized religion a long time ago because of it.  

When it comes to politics I have never identified myself as a member of any party. I've always voted for who I thought was best for the job. I was upset about Clinton and besides myself when it comes to Trump.   As far as the SB show, kids sell e 1000x worse online, unfortunately. 

ETA

Bolded used to drive my family crazy as my grandfather was very active in democrat party.  He had even met with JFK on a number of occasions. My mom turned down a wedding proposal from the son of a democrat senator too. Then I had a sibling marry into the McCain family.    :lmao: crazy

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Our brains can make all sorts of rationalizations in our heads for why we're not being hypocritical, even though any outside observer would see it that way. 

 
Anyone who takes on the role of public intellectual risks some sort of charge of hypocrisy. It's impossible to hitch a star to either flawed people like a politician or a moral agent like one's self and expect to be perfect at it. It's who were are.

The important thing is we at least strive to be conscious of it -- to be better -- even if we don't live up to our own ideals. 

 
We like to think that we all have a guiding set of principles that we adhere to at all costs.  I think very few people in the world actually work that way.  I think no one works that way in politics.

At the end of the day, most people are voting for the candidate that’s best for their own interests.  Growing up in rural Kentucky, I’ve always been surrounded by coal miners.  I remember Al Gore talking about doing away with coal mining jobs.  And a state that went Blue for Clinton in 96 suddenly went back to Red against the VP they had just had. College kids surely love the idea of free college.  People are going to naturally support someone who lowers their taxes.

Secondly:  a lot of issues form a tangled web.  How can you argue for limited government and yet want government to intervene in Abortion issues?  How can you argue about the importance of the constitution and then try to alter the 1st or 2nd ammendments?  And it’s just more nuanced than that.  You can believe multiple things that are at odds with each other. 

 
Matthew 7:2-3 addresses this pretty well and it is really good advice whether you are religious or not.

Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye?

There is very little consistency in how either side judges one another, and that is a shame.  Both sides have just changed sides using the exact same rhetoric of their opponents during the Clinton years vs. the Trump years.  I find people way too judgmental when it comes to judging the other side.  I tend to favor being less judgmental, while not giving a complete free pass for corruption.  That said, I think both Clinton and Trump did enough to be removed.  They both took advantage of their power for personal gain which one area that needs to be judged in our leaders, especially in our President.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A lot of life isn't about being consistent in our positions and arguments. Rather, it's about winning the argument. I, at times, will knowingly use something I don't really believe in an effort to win an argument. It's not that I'm blind to that hypocrisy; it's that, in the moment, I don't really care that I'm being hypocritical.

But, for situations where I am blind to my hypocrisy, I'd say it comes from my presuppositions. There's something that I hold to be unquestionably true and if I'm not going to question that supposed truth, then I must justify things that potentially contradict that truth. For simplicity sake, someone might have the presupposition that Republican = Good and Democrat = Bad. Rather than question that black and white presupposition, someone might then be forced to justify Trump's action while vilifying Clinton's because that's what best fits the overarching presupposition. Those hypocrisies are really hard to see when I'm not willing to question some core beliefs.

 
Liberal Dem who thought the Superbowl performance with stripper polls and hiney's/crotches was a bad look for sure. Then we freak out when chicks are shaking it at High School dances. 

 
I'm interested in the percieved hypocrasies of the left because there might be blind spots for sure. 

 
My inconsistent views or actions are colorful idiosyncrasies, they are me embracing paradox, keeping an open mind, and of course acknowledging subtle, nearly imperceptible differences not apparent to lesser intellects.

Your inconsistent views or behaviors are dangerous hypocrisies indicative of a depraved mind and heart.

 
Liberal Dem who thought the Superbowl performance with stripper polls and hiney's/crotches was a bad look for sure. Then we freak out when chicks are shaking it at High School dances. 
I for one found the performance inappropriate for the time and place but that did not stop me from watching and focusing in particular upon those very hineys and crotches you mentioned.  Perhaps I wanted my disgust to be fully and well informed.

 
I genuinely strive for intellectual consistency. When a political situation arises, I ask myself, "How would I feel if the roles were reversed?" But I'm sure I frequently fall short of my ideals. 

And that's not the worst thing in the world. I believe our country is better off when Democrats are running things. Other people believe the same about Republicans. Is it really a surprise that those beliefs will affect how we view specific situations?

Also, because we've fetishized intellectual consistency to such a degree, people operating in bad faith are constantly drawing false equivalencies in order to play "gotcha" and weaponize charges of hypocrisy. The most prominent example that comes to mind is Trump trying to portray Biden as corrupt over Ukraine. It's not hypocritical for liberals to refuse to condemn Biden because the entire charge is made up, and he did nothing wrong. 

 
I thought Shakira was beautiful and appropriately sexy.  J. Lo is also a beautiful woman, but she tries too hard to be sexy.  Her outfits are overly revealing and her moves are not nearly as elegant as Shakira.  I don't think I would call it inappropriate, but unneccessay which actually takes away from the attractiveness.

 
I'm interested in the percieved hypocrasies of the left because there might be blind spots for sure. 
I remember "scandals" over Al Gore riding in a SUV, Bernie Sanders flying in private jet, and AOC for using Uber over the more environmentally-friendly subway.

 
I thought Shakira was beautiful and appropriately sexy.  J. Lo is also a beautiful woman, but she tries too hard to be sexy.  Her outfits are overly revealing and her moves are not nearly as elegant as Shakira.  I don't think I would call it inappropriate, but unneccessay which actually takes away from the attractiveness.
Id agree here...though, a friend's 10 year old let out an audible "whoa!" when she bent over.  JLo definitely went a bit more showy with the costumes.  But were they all that more revealing than a normal NFL cheerleader outfits...some of those are just as bad.

A moment if you have a young girl to tell her that is not appropriate for her (my 12 year old is into dance and my wife talked with her about being happy we are at a dance studio that doesn't overly make up the girls and the costumes are much more appropriate for their ages).  

Kids have seen all the things JLo did before...it wasn't some shock that they would dress provocatively and shake their ###.

 
With all due respect I absolutely think ‘hypocrisy’ is one of the worst buzzwords for deflection in modern politics. It results in nullification of everything and nihilism in every discussion.

Please just speak in positive values. What do you believe in, why, and how is that evident in what’s going on. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember "scandals" over Al Gore riding in a SUV, Bernie Sanders flying in private jet, and AOC for using Uber over the more environmentally-friendly subway.
i kind of put these in the "person who wants to improve society guilty of particuipating in society" category. If you aren't in the street in sackcloth and ashes how can you possibly be for X issue? 

 
Perfect example of someone being blind to their own hypocrisy.

As for the Super Bowl halftime show, it was a great example of the hypocrisy in the media, politics, and society.

At the end of the day, women want attention and will do just about anything to get it, especially if it involves shaking their ### and showing some skin. 

At the end of the day, men want sex and will do just about anything to get it, even if they publicly pretend to care about #metoo and "values".

Basically everyone is full of #### and projects their sins on the other person.
It's kind of sad that you think people don't care about women's rights. Heck maybe they don't, I might be naive. But I live those values everyday in the way I hire, develop and promote women in my profession for instance. Consience clean on that one. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don’t see anything hypocritical in speaking out against the increasing objectification of women in our culture and a performance that seemed to encourage it.

Clinton’s scandal was that he lied under oath, encouraged others to lie under oath and destroyed evidence in an effort to subvert a #MeToo sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him.  The age difference and extramarital part added to the tawdriness, but it was the criminal conspiracy to deny a woman/victim her day in court that launched it as a scandal.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My inconsistent views or actions are colorful idiosyncrasies, they are me embracing paradox, keeping an open mind, and of course acknowledging subtle, nearly imperceptible differences not apparent to lesser intellects.

Your inconsistent views or behaviors are dangerous hypocrisies indicative of a depraved mind and heart.
The Fundamental Attribution Error is strong with this one.

 
I think it's important to recognize and correct our own hypocrisy before we try to fix someone else. I know I'm guilty of it, that's why I try to get better every day.

 
I feel like there are two separate questions at play here:

1. Has Franklin Graham damaged the reputation of the evangelical Christian church/religion by A) mixing politics & religion, and/or B) excusing the deplorable behavior of Donald Trump?

(my answer: yes)

2. Is Franklin Graham being a hypocrite by condemning the Super Bowl halftime show while looking the other way when it comes to Donald Trump?

(my answer: not really. It seems like Graham's general philosophy is to condemn the sin that he sees while giving a pass to what he doesn't see.)

 
A total unwillingness to express beliefs, values and ideology for fear of the consequences.
Thanks @SaintsInDome2006

Now that's interesting as I would argue much of the issue is that there ARE consequences. I think I might could make the argument people are ignoring, not fearing the consequences.

Meaning you'd think a Franklin Graham would realize he's surrendering all claim on any moral high ground with his strong support of President Trump. Yet it's like he's forgotten all that. 

I'm guessing his answer is more along the lines of "But this is DIFFERENT..." The reality though is many people don't see it that way. 

 
At the end of the day, I don't have a problem with most hypocrisy, as long as there is a explainable basis for different treatments, and they don't act holier than thou at the same time about it (which is where I have issues with the likes of Graham and Falwell).  On the Lewinsky/Stormy one that Joe mentioned, I supported Clinton's impeachment, but I could see someone saying that the campaign finance violations entailed in Stormy Daniels makes that one more troublesome.

But, in general, like the last line in Some Like It Hot says, "Nobody's perfect."  We're all just muddling through and trying to make the best possible choices possible.  Hypocrisy is just a feature of a complicated life and the choices that we have to make that rarely have a universally, perfect answer.

I'm for some reason reminded of The Good Place (minor spoilers ahead) where the points system to get into the good place is revealed to be bunk by way of an example of someone trying to be good by buying flowers for their grandma, but ends up getting negative points because he ordered them on his phone which was assembled in a sweatshop, the flowers were grown with pesticides, and the CEO of the flower company was a serial sexual harasser. Choices are just often not as simple as they seem.

 
Perfect example of someone being blind to their own hypocrisy.
You're entitled to your opinion. My conscience is clean on that issue. Furthermore, I think the facts show Trump very consciously decided to gin up this false narrative so that he could use the hypocrisy charge to deflect from his own blatant corruption.

Basically everyone is full of #### and projects their sins on the other person.
True. Some more than others.

 
I also think part of the outrage is the "uptight American" stereotype.  This performance is over the line because of sexual hangups but video games and TV shows that display horrid murders on a daily basis is ignored. I would MUCH rather my kids watch the former. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can an alleged moral leader call out the Superbowl halftime show as immoral while at the same time stumping for Donald Trump?  Of course he/she can.  If there is an audience.

Should whatever they have to say on either subject be taken seriously by anyone listening with an objective ear?  Of course not.  It is absurd.  

There will always be hypocrisy in all of us.  The goal is to recognize it and, as best we can, suppress it and keep it on the fringes of how we engage in both public and private life.  But overt hypocrisy like this Graham nonsense should be called out, ridiculed and, frankly, condemned.  

 
I don’t see anything hypocritical in speaking out against the increasing objectification of women in our culture and a performance that seemed to encourage it.
The hypocritical part is that Graham also supports Trump, who besides cheating on his wife with a porn star and accusations of rape, has a history of objectifying women.

 
I also think part of the outrage is the "uptight American" stereotype.  This performance is over the line because of sexual hangups but video games and TV shows that display horrid murders on a daily basis is ignored. I would MUCH rather my kids watch the former. 
Agreed. Messed up priorties on sex and violence. But I think the complicating factor is the Superbowl and the pagentry around it is seen for better or worse as a shared national experience. So to some degree it's values are reflective of the nation's values. Whereas other media is more fragmented and directed at specific audiences. If I had a daughter that would make me uncomfortable. I thought it was especially cringeworthy to go from climbing the pole to singing with all the little children. Wut? 

 
Agreed. Messed up priorties on sex and violence. But I think the complicating factor is the Superbowl and the pagentry around it is seen for better or worse as a shared national experience. So to some degree it's values are reflective of the nation's values. Whereas other media is more fragmented and directed at specific audiences. If I had a daughter that would make me uncomfortable. I thought it was especially cringeworthy to go from climbing the pole to singing with all the little children. Wut? 
For sure.  Women in our culture are always getting conflicting messages. 

 
Thanks @SaintsInDome2006

Now that's interesting as I would argue much of the issue is that there ARE consequences. I think I might could make the argument people are ignoring, not fearing the consequences.

Meaning you'd think a Franklin Graham would realize he's surrendering all claim on any moral high ground with his strong support of President Trump. Yet it's like he's forgotten all that. 

I'm guessing his answer is more along the lines of "But this is DIFFERENT..." The reality though is many people don't see it that way. 
Hi, Joe. - As to Graham, no, not really. I'm not seeking to minimize or belittle or destroy anyone's POV or moral high or low ground. We all speak from our own swatch of ground. I do think people need to consider also if they are themselves trying to persuade others or are simply speaking for themselves. And part of what happens here on this forum and others like is people switch back and forth (which is fine) or different posters may be doing one and then someone else may do the other right behind it.

I remember Shamrock once nicked me for calling for a link for someone on something, and it occurred to me that sometimes people just come here to say their feelings on something. I like pie. No way man pie sucks. Oh yeah where's your support for this anti-pie position? Etc.

- As for Graham I think considering he is out trying to proselytize people as a public figure he should be held to account, but then in my mind what that means is looking at his stated values on any given thing. About Graham and this specific issue - I don't have a problem with it. Technically this stance on the behavior or mores on display at the SB is probably in keeping with his stated position. The place where it craters is when he speaks on Trump and the Trump movement. I'm not accusing him of being insincere or false on that issue of Trump and All Things Trump, I'm suggesting that he like thousands of others in the Trump movement change their values or suppress them for this singular man, who poses himself as a leader. And I feel comfortable saying that having read quite a bit on history and how this is not not happening in a vacuum but rather is a condition of human existence that is dangerous when writ large.

 
On the other hand, I've seen people upset about the Stormy Daniels stuff that were silent during Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky issues. 
"Hypocrisy" is a charge made by someone who sees things as similar against someone who sees them as different.

Sometimes that's just because they see things differently. 

For example, I don't think the Stormy Daniels thing is anything like the Monica Lewinsky thing, but that's because I don't really care if the president cheats on his wife.  It's disappointing, and it probably indicates some ethical problems, but marital fidelity is not a job requirement. 

I'm also not overly concerned about Trump paying Daniels off, nor was I concerned about Clinton lying under oath or "it depends what the definition of intercourse is".  The idea that politicians lie is not new and most of the outrage is phony, in my opinion.

But for other people, it's a huge deal, and I would probably seem like a hypocrite to them because we are considering totally different things.  

What's very concerning to me in the Daniels case is that there's a pattern of illegal activity related to the election.  So I see that as a single data point in a much larger picture.  And I pay attention to news that shows me other data points that are negative about trump. 

But when Clinton was president, i didn't take a lot of the rumors about him seriously, so I didn't dig deep into them. A lot of people can tell you everything about Trump's misdeeds but don't know much at all about Benghazi. And vice versa.  

Because we don't know bad things about our guy, and we don't want to know.  We don't seek out that information and we want to argue against it when it's first presented to us. 

Again, that's not hypocrisy, that's just two people with different information. They may be willfully avoiding having the same information, but it's not hypocrisy.  

Hypocrisy is when you're fully aware of the facts, share the same criteria for judging those facts, and come to a different conclusion in functionally identical cases for your own benefit.  

But even then, it's tough to judge if someone's actually a hypocrite or just a liar.  I don't think McConnell is a hypocrite.  I think he's deliberately dishonest.  He's arguing for things that benefit him and his party because that's his job.  I don't think he believes for a minute that trump's innocent, I think he believes it's in his party's best interests to act like he does.  I feel the same way about a lot of trump supporters who are aware that he did something really bad and know they'd feel very differently if it wasn't their guy but still act like they don't believe he did anything wrong because it's better to lie than to admit the truth. 

The real hypocrites, to me, are the people who genuinely believe that he's innocent despite being unable to explain what he did in any way that sounds legal. It's the moment that you have the information to know that you're wrong but refuse to acknowledge it to yourself that you become a hypocrite, imo. 

 
i still don't get the outrage over the halftime show.  i loved it.  skimpy clothes?  they're rocks stars FFS....
I agree. As it happened, my 9-year-old son wasn't really interested in the halftime show, but I don't think he would have been scarred by watching it. And if I did have a daughter, I don't think it would have been the worst thing in the world for her to see two strong, athletic women in their 40s/50s showing off their talents. This isn't some vulnerable 18-year-old starlet taking her top off because the troglodytic director told her that if she didn't, she'd never work in this town again. These are empowered businesswomen who are in control of their own careers. I really don't see the problem there.

 
The hypocritical part is that Graham also supports Trump, who besides cheating on his wife with a porn star and accusations of rape, has a history of objectifying women.
Condemn the sin and not the sinner is still a thing.  One can condemn messages the encourage “sin” but forgive the sinner.  The alleged tryst with Stormy was 15 years ago.  Trump has objectified women in the past, but he has also promoted, hired and appointed many to his campaign and administration.

 
Condemn the sin and not the sinner is still a thing.  One can condemn messages the encourage “sin” but forgive the sinner.  The alleged tryst with Stormy was 15 years ago.  Trump has objectified women in the past, but he has also promoted, hired and appointed many to his campaign and administration.
Isn't atoning for sin a necessary component? To my knowledge Trump has never apologized for, well, anything.

 
Isn't atoning for sin a necessary component? To my knowledge Trump has never apologized for, well, anything.
The alleged affair would have wronged Melania and his family and God.  I don’t know whether or not he apologized to them and I don’t know if Franklin even knows....

 
The alleged affair would have wronged Melania and his family and God.  I don’t know whether or not he apologized to them and I don’t know if Franklin even knows....
You're right, we don't know what he told Melania. But we do know that, to this day, he continues to deny everything: the affair(s), the 2016 payoffs, him authorizing Cohen to make the payoffs. That certainly does not suggest even the remotest level of contrition.

Also worth pointing out that Trump is on record saying he has never asked God for forgiveness.

 
Condemn the sin and not the sinner is still a thing.  One can condemn messages the encourage “sin” but forgive the sinner.  The alleged tryst with Stormy was 15 years ago.  Trump has objectified women in the past, but he has also promoted, hired and appointed many to his campaign and administration.
I mean you don't have to be upset by it, but any way you slice it, it's clearly hypocritical.

We all heard him talking about grabbing you-know-whats.

If you want to support him after that, fine. But you don't get to play the "family values" card anymore.

 
With all due respect I absolutely think ‘hypocrisy’ is one of the worst buzzwords for deflection in modern politics. It results in nullification of everything and nihilism in every discussion.

Please just speak in positive values. What do you believe in, why, and how is that evident in what’s going on. 
It's like lying.  Everyone does it, so it's about scale, intent and degree of blindness.

 
The hypocritical part is that Graham also supports Trump, who besides cheating on his wife with a porn star and accusations of rape, has a history of objectifying women.
Condemn the sin and not the sinner is still a thing.  One can condemn messages the encourage “sin” but forgive the sinner.  The alleged tryst with Stormy was 15 years ago.  Trump has objectified women in the past, but he has also promoted, hired and appointed many to his campaign and administration.
What does the employment data have to do with Trump's history of objectifying women? I don't understand that correlation.

 
The human brain has an amazing ability to rationalize.  It’s an innate defense mechanism that interrupts the normal processing of new information/data in order to avoid a result that creates fear, anxiety, depression, etc. Ironically, it often makes us consistently wrong.  

It can only really be overcome by someone willing to except that they are flawed.  Specifically, an acceptance of their insecurities, fears, inadequacies, etc.  Something not easy for most people to do.  It’s easier to cover up these traits by deflecting, misdirecting, rationalizing, etc.  

The loud obnoxious guy or the peacocking princess are often just covering up their insecurities. It’s probably easiest to see at your local bar/pub, but it’s quite noticeable around here as well. That’s why it’s so hard to have legitimate, extended conversations.  It’s inevitably going to get sidetracked by people who feel they need attention more than they need to learn.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top