Have you been following the news about Donald Trump’s search for talent to perform at his inauguration? He’s not having much luck. Sad!
He does have the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, though, and some performer from a reality TV show. My favorites, though, are two bands I never heard of: The Reagan Years and The MIXX, cover bands that do oldies. The best part: they’re the same band! They use different names for different musical eras. So basically Trump gets to pad his list of performers by counting the same people twice.
But the saddest performers have to be the Radio City Rockettes. The inauguration committee has happily secured them by getting their “owner” to twist their arms. James Dolan, their boss, signed them up and told them that they are under contract and will be fired if they don’t dance for their new overlord. At least one of them has spoken up.
I usually don’t use social media to make a political stand but I feel overwhelmed with emotion. Finding out that it has been decided for us that Rockettes will be performing at the Presidential inauguration makes me feel embarrassed and disappointed. The women I work with are intelligent and are full of love and the decision of performing for a man that stands for everything we’re against is appalling. I am speaking for just myself but please know that after we found out this news, we have been performing with tears in our eyes and heavy hearts. We will not be forced! #notmypresident
They’ve also been informed by their union that they must perform.
We have received an email from a Rockette expressing concern about getting ‘involved in a dangerous political climate’ but I must remind you that you are all employees, and as a company, Mr. Dolan obviously wants the Rockettes to be represented at our country’s Presidential inauguration, as they were in 2001 & 2005. Any talk of boycotting this event is invalid, I’m afraid.
We have been made aware of what is going on Facebook and other social media, however, this does not change anything unless Radio City has a change of heart. The ranting of the public is just that, ranting. Everyone has a right to an opinion, but this does not change your employment status for those who are full time … Everyone is entitled to her own political beliefs, but there is no room for this in the workplace.
I have to agree (but not with the tone). If we can say that bakers don’t get to discriminate in making wedding cakes for their customers, we have to say that professional dancers have an obligation to do their work, no matter who pays for it.
Still, I thought unions were supposed to fight for the rights of the workers, rather than management — and that union representative is clearly not on the side of their constituents.
Also, if I were commissioning an art performance, and I learned that the artists did not find any joy in working for me and were at best going to make a workman-like effort with no heart behind it, I wouldn’t demand that they do it — there’d be no point to a celebration without a celebratory attitude. But from what I see of Trump, he’s probably getting an extra thrill out of subjugating reluctant women to his will.
He’s also getting desperate. If he can’t force people to sing and dance for him, he’s only going to have a bunch of no-talent hacks singing his praises.
Some good news: the union has agreed that all participation in this event is entirely voluntary.
I feel sorry for the Rockettes, that’s a lousy deal, I have been laughing over the several articles I’ve read about the lack of talent though. The Trump team has announced several times they have “so and so” only to be met by a ferocious denial from the so and so. Even Garth Brooks turned them down. Then I read about a free concert after the inauguration – is it just going to be an empty stage?
So the only way he can get somebody who actually has some quality is by forcing them. Better get used to it, USA.
Not so. The law says you can’t discriminate against a potential customer because of religion, race or creed, or because of sexual orientation. There is nothing to say you can’t discriminate for other reasons, such as a potential customer having a lengthy record of treating women poorly in everything he says or does; or because he is in general an asshole.
Apparently The Reagan Years and The Mixx are actually the same group of musicians, except the former does exclusively ’80s covers (I’m betting that they’re more likely to do “Sussudio” than “Political Song For Michael Jackson to Sing”) and the other group is more generalized. I’m kind of gratified by this clusterfk because it’s apparently getting under Agent Orange’s skin – he thought he was Mr. Show Biz and it turns out that no one likes him.
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that the Dixie Chicks won’t be attending either.
According to the latest reports I’ve seen the Beach Boys are consider playing. Also, in other news, the Beach Boys are still alive.
Let us hope that part of the contract for the Rockettes to perform strictly bars Trump from their dressing rooms, or–if it doesn’t–that any attempt at entry gives the dancers an excuse to call off the performance. “Hostile work environment” might be an apt description.
Actually, I recall The Non Prophets making some good points regarding this quite some time back. One of which was that they think they would be fine if a baker refused to decorate a cake with rainbows. Or, to show why this should be acceptable, a cake with swastikas. A baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple that they would otherwise bake for a straight couple is where this is definitely problematic.
This essentially came out of a response to Mike Huckabee who said something about how we wouldn’t force a sandwich shop to make a certain type of sandwich that isn’t on their menu. The Non Prophets pointed out that Huckabee’s analogy was flawed because, when we talk about bakeries, we are talking about them refusing to make products that are on their menu.
The conversation, though, did deviate to where they thought that artists should have a fair amount of license to refuse service if they are being asked to do something against their typical service.
That all said…yeah, since the Rockettes work for Radio City as opposed to being independently managed, they would indeed seem to be in a jam because they apparently are not in charge of their own scheduling.
Leo Buzalsky, does this mean the Rockettes can be made to perform their usual repertoire, but can’t be required to specifically be complimentary of Trump?
I can’t find it now, but I recently saw a Mormon petition asking the Choir not to perform, stating that Mr Trump represents everything the church opposes.
There is apparently an anti-Inauguration Day Concert being setup to play precisely during the inauguration in protest. I’ve seen many big names sighed up. (can’t provide a list) Initially, when it was a mere suggestion, one name was mentioned, who I’m a big fan of, and who I’d think would be the leader of the charge, was Mr Springsteel [sic]. Haven’t seen his name in the actual event yet, still expecting to see it though.
yet. according to Daily Mail *spit* ::
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4059096/Dems-plan-rival-concert-Trump-inauguration-Miami-claim-talent-knocking-door-in.html
Springsteen’s name is there!!! Hooray, too bad I won’t be anywhere near Miami. rats. *pout*
ideally, I’d like to support any Rockette who flatly resigns rather than acquiesce to performing for inaugurating the orange Turd as president. Unfortunately I don’t have the means, so can only offer words. shit. easy to say, but I am sincere, not just empty words. shitfuck.
But then I heard that the group of shouting men and women (aka. Mormon Tab. Choir) have been booked on accounts of Trumps close enough support for polygamous relationships.
I suspect the fact that the Rockettes don’t WANT to perform, but are instead being coerced into it, makes it even better for Trump and his supporters.
…and somehow I missed the line in your post where you said that exact thing. Sorry!
Well, he could still come up with a little ditty himself. I’ve got the role model right here:
https://youtu.be/pBIswXv28GI
Following up on comments 10 and 13.
Pressure is mounting for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir to back out of the promise to perform at Trump’s inauguration:
The Hill link
I wonder what would happen if they quite deliberately gave the absolute worst performance they ever have?
Googling around has led me to think that any Rockette who refuses to perform when told to perform, has ended her dance career.
Any dancer who deliberately screws-up a performance has also ended their carreer.
If enough of The Rockettes registered their strong displeasure and threatened to resign, perhaps their employers might be persuaded to avoid the disintegration of the dance company by allowing those who were willing to perform for Trump to do so outside of the normal contract.
The splinter group could call themselves The ICBMs.
I’ve seen the same thing, chigau.
Getting a job as a dancer in New York City is like winning the lottery (that takes years of practice and discipline to enter); anybody who would leave over this can’t just trip and fall into a new job, and the company won’t have any trouble replacing anybody who would leave.
I just hope that the dancers who have publicly expressed concerns about this aren’t punished for it. Yeah, it’d probably be illegal, but that hasn’t stopped conservatives in the past. After all, they can afford to have this tied up in litigation for years.
Sorry, I disagree.
A baker can’t refuse a couple a wedding cake just because they are of the same sex, because same sex couples have the right to marry like anybody else, and their marriage hurts no one.
Inaugurating a fascist for president on the other hand is quite a different thing. People not only can, but have the moral obligation* to refuse to cooperate with that. This is not just about “different political views”, this is about a president-elect who happily and repeatedly did, would and will violate people’s rights.
It is ironic in a very sick way that the Radio City Rockettes are forced by contract to perform for someone who never cared much about keeping contracts himself. If they only had as much money for legal assistance as he does.
* Not that I would blame the Radio City Rockettes if they do perform, given the possible consequences if they refuse to; but is there a way we can support them?
How ironic if the Reality Tee Vee Celebrity Star President can’t even get other Reality Tee Vee Celebrity Star Entertainers to perform at his shindigs. Perhaps they need a panel of judges and prizes. Perhaps he, Ivanka, and “The Boys” could be the judges. Perhaps the prizes could be ambassadorships or low-level government posts or lucrative government contracts. As a Reality Tee Vee Celebrity Star, Zippy would do it for Ambassador to Fantasy Island…I guarantee it! (© George Zimmer, Men’s Wharehouse™)
One of those rare times when you gotta thank bog for agents. If Hollywood and the US music scene was run today like it was in he 40s, Louis B Mayer and all his cronies would be forcing all their actors to make appearances just as the Rockettes.
American entertainers are spoiled, self-entitled pricks but their wealth at least gives them the autonomy to not automatically do whatever some oligarch tells them to do. I expect the oligarchs will have the upper hand as soon as they succeed in making all entertainment ad-supported.
I have heard that David Foster and Celine Dion were asked, but declined (really desperate when you have to ask foreign talent).
re @22:
I don;t know how it specifically works, but first suggestion is gofundme,org. not sure how jigger it to fund a group who decides to resign their current employment. gofundme is such a common way to fund recovery from a personal disaster that it seems like funding people let go for refusing to pander, out of protest would be very appropriate use of such funding mechanism.
just a suggestion. I know nothing.
A private performance of a dance troupe at your fancy, expensive, private victory party is not the same thing as being denied public accommodation, and president elects are not a protected class. Sorry, PZ, the equivalence you made regarding fundie bakers is a false one. Power structures matter.
re 27:
Who said any of the inauguration performance was private besides you, huh? I think not.
@slithey tove #28: The tickets for Trump’s party range between 25K and a million dollars. That’s not a public accommodation in the same way as access to a bakery or a pharmacy is by any stretch of the imagination.
it’s like he has a history of not paying artists that perform at his events and now they’ve all wised up to his scam.
The noun becomes plural, not the adjective. Presidents elect are not a protected class.
Oh bullshit. That’s like saying “if a store can’t refuse to serve someone and order them to leave because of their race, then they can’t refuse to serve someone and order them to leave because they’re a known shoplifter.”
What nonsense is this!? Gay people don’t choose to be gay and fall in love! But bigots certainly choose to be bigots!
@OwlMirror: Thanks. I knew that didn’t sound quite right.
re @29:
shit, you caught me. apologies.
I guess I was distracted by the bigger picture (ie more than your isolated comment). That not only are they being contractually mandated to perform, i hear there are threats of blacklisting if they refuse and void their contract. Supposedly they can’t just resign and seek employment elsewhere, he threatens that he has enough industry wide clout to ruin their chances if they refuse to dance for this one event.
Maybe I’m reading too much into this, inferring too much from rumors. just trying to explain my rude response to you earlier. sorry.
[not sarcastically]
@ slithy tove: It’s okay, I think I had a communication breakdown on my end, because a re-read of my initial comment isn’t nearly as clear as I thought it was when I wrote it.
I’m in disagreement with PZ that entertainers being forced to perform at the party of a fascist leader-elect against their wills is remotely comparable to bigots not wanting to grant access to public accommodations to marginalized people. In order for that comparison to work, contractually obligated female dancers would have to = bigoted business owners who want to deny certain marginalized groups access to their services and Trump would have to = LGBT customers attempting to access that which is open to the rest of the public. That comparison doesn’t work for me because A) the dancers are powerless in this situation, their boss and Trump are the ones with the power and B) accessing entertainment for a rich people’s party isn’t a public accommodation rights issue, and C) presidents elect aren’t a marginalized group, nor are political positions.
That’s why I said the power matters. Who hold the power here? Who is being harmed? Who has recourse? Who has options? Those are the questions that didn’t seem to get asked before PZ decided this was akin to not baking cakes for LGBT people.
At inauguration Trump should just project himself on widescreen for his adoring subjects, lying in gilded bed eating meatloaf and tweeting… followed by a grand illusionist act on the Whitehouse lawn. Ah, but all others should not forsake art… maybe, for a moment…
1 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccLW2Jb_lJM
2 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SynI_iChmWk
I’ve been reading today that Trump has decided that since he can’t get any A-list performers for his inauguration he never wanted A-list performers to begin with.
manymistakes #37
Do you have a point?
or are you looking for free advertising?
@ PZ, you missing an important part with your update on this post!
So they actually DO still have to perform.
Forced to perform for the overlord of darkness. Fine. Just don’t dance well and wear Not my President T-shirts.
I’m gonna have to second the people disagreeing with PZ. You’re perfectly allowed to discriminate against people for reasons that aren’t “belonging to a protected class”.
If I come into a cake shop, insult the staff and say a bunch of racist shit, they’d be perfectly legally justified in refusing to serve me.
I am imagining a gala inaugural extravaganza hosted by Dennis Miller. It might feature Hank Williams, Jr. if his voice holds out. Also some duck calls by the Duck Dynasty folks and a serenade by the little girls who were allegedly stiffed after an appearance at a Trump primary appearance. Maybe a stand-up bit by Jerry Lewis. A Russian tumbling troupe, as a gift from Putin. The whole show will last 45 minutes, tops. No one but Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy will review it. And they will love it.
Further more, I’m kind of curious how far that logic would take us. Are the various businesses and entertainers boycotting HB2 violating accommodation law by refusing to do their service in North Carolina?
Merry Christmas everyone.
In a sad 2016 the only “good news” has been the shooting of the Islamist Berlin trucker by police. His “slaughter the infidel pigs” video made it clear this was a religious hate crime of the worst order.
For once we can address (with satire) the idea and not the person or culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvLPJEkrlxo
Let’s hope 2017 can be more of a religiou/ideological free zone.
deepwater #45
bless your heart
have a nice day
have a porcupine
On the update: Mashable’s coverage suggests that Madison Square Garden said performing at the inauguration is voluntary. But, they also said they already have plenty of dancers willing to perform.
I’ve been to enough situations where coming to work on a weekend or holiday was absolutely voluntary but the work was due Monday. So kinda… not really a choice. I’m afraid that’s the kind of voluntary they are dealing with too.
Where’s Ted Nugent in all of this. He’s a rock star.
I want to briefly explain the union’s perspective on this, because I’ve had to send a similar letter a time or two. If workers make a concerted effort to organize towards _not_ working, that’s an illegal work stoppage, which puts not just the individual dancers but the union itself at risk. So in its formal communications, it needs to send a strong message that this behavior is not OK.
Before Radio City (NOT the union) relented, I had a plan where the Rockettes would take the stage wearing subtle chain-link bracelets to represent that they were forced to be on stage while all the casual dancers would boycott and appear in front of the building wearing chains. The media would be cued to this about ten minutes before the performance.
Piling on the already well made points that the bakery analogy makes no sense. Not a public accomodation, not a protected class and primarily a labor law issue.
Frankly, if I were in their position, I’d resign, effectively immediately.
Private citizens not being able to discriminate against other private citizens is one thing. But performers absolutely should get the choice to turn down a job that celebrates a political figure, especially if their performance is used to convey or bolster a particular political message.
Chris Hall (#6)
That’s not the real Beach Boys (as when all surviving 60’s members including Brian Wilson and Al Jardine toured and released a top 3-charting album in 2012), but just Mike Love (who is paying a fee for the license to tour as “The Beach Boys”) with his band of salaried musicians.
As early as September, Love said he would probably play if asked by his friend Trump.
wzrd1 (#52)
Pointless statement, since you aren’t in their position. Talk is cheap.
@Vivec #42 – That’s the best explanation of it so far. Kudos.
Fun fact: when I joined the union, the conditions explicitly stated that support for or membership of a fascist organization is reason for expulsion.
Performing at an inauguration is taken as an endorsement by the performers. It is is a political act. Trump will say so and so came to it.
That is not the same as baking a cake for a customer.
Last comment doesn’t clarify as well as I wanted.
It’s a difference between providing your standard performance at a party or stage show and appearing in public support of a political position.
Ok last one.
Cake shop is asked to write our shop supports gay pride. I think they could refuse to give that endorsement.
DanDare, as I understand it, there’s this conceit whereby one is supposed to “Respect the Office of the Presidency”, regardless of one’s respect for its incumbent.
(Love the sin, hate the sinner!)
Showing respect to a person that is ostensibly supposed to promote the will of the people, even if he completely ignores the will of most of their constituency, simply because he has some political position, seems rather antithetical the whole point of having elected representatives rather than monarchs.
I find this puzzling. Mormonism was founded by a professional con artist and serial pussy-grabber.
Omg “the Regan years” is a local band here in Frederick MD, they play over in the westview shopping center all the time. What makes me laugh is that they are an 80’s cover band and they would need to get the rights to all those songs if they were to perform at a venue like the inauguration. They might get on stage and have nothing to play.
I predict a bad case of intentional flu might break out around Jan 18th….. ;-)
The eejit who is to be inaugurated seems to believe, and certainly acts like, rules don’t apply to him or to what he wants. If he wants this band, then they don’t need to follow those rules, because he wants them…
How do you sue a cheeto-faced despot for copyright infringement when he is the President?
Same way as usual, in the courts. He is not immune from all lawsuits:
However, all that seems somewhat moot, since the discussion is the band obtaining the needed permissions. I believe it is their responsibility, not that of whoever hired them.