Pearl Jam made the logic behind the NC cancellation clear the day they did it in Hampton. Paraphrasing Eddie Vedder, 'there was a picket line, and we didn't feel like we could cross it'.
I think it's as simple as that agree with it or not. Im sure Pearl Jam is equally disgusted with the Tennessee law as many of us are. The difference is there is not an active boycott going on against the state. Could Pearl Jam lead that charge? Sure. Just not sure a Bonnaroo gig is a wise show to cancel to start that charge. The festival would go on, the economic impact would be zero, and Pearl Jam would be the only ones paying the price. Yes it would be commendable of them to cancel, and it could lead to a larger boycott of the state, but I think expecting them to do so is a bit unfair given the circumstances.
Pearl Jam made the logic behind the NC cancellation clear the day they did it in Hampton. Paraphrasing Eddie Vedder, 'there was a picket line, and we didn't feel like we could cross it'.
I think it's as simple as that agree with it or not. Im sure Pearl Jam is equally disgusted with the Tennessee law as many of us are. The difference is there is not an active boycott going on against the state. Could Pearl Jam lead that charge? Sure. Just not sure a Bonnaroo gig is a wise show to cancel to start that charge. The festival would go on, the economic impact would be zero, and Pearl Jam would be the only ones paying the price. Yes it would be commendable of them to cancel, and it could lead to a larger boycott of the state, but I think expecting them to do so is a bit unfair given the circumstances.
This law was just passed... I'm sure by June it could be a similar situation to North Carolina...
Pearl Jam made the logic behind the NC cancellation clear the day they did it in Hampton. Paraphrasing Eddie Vedder, 'there was a picket line, and we didn't feel like we could cross it'.
I think it's as simple as that agree with it or not. Im sure Pearl Jam is equally disgusted with the Tennessee law as many of us are. The difference is there is not an active boycott going on against the state. Could Pearl Jam lead that charge? Sure. Just not sure a Bonnaroo gig is a wise show to cancel to start that charge. The festival would go on, the economic impact would be zero, and Pearl Jam would be the only ones paying the price. Yes it would be commendable of them to cancel, and it could lead to a larger boycott of the state, but I think expecting them to do so is a bit unfair given the circumstances.
So PJ shouldn't be leaders, just followers? At least that would be consistent. Anyway, there is an active boycott starting, just not as loudly and visibly as Bruce and PJ. My state's (and PJ's) Secretary of State is boycotting a national secretaries of state conference in TN this summer due to this legislation. Since PJ won't take a leadership role here, they can at least follow their state leadership. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/secretary-of-state-her-staff-to-skip-tennessee-meeting/
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
What "precedent" was set? They took a stand on one issue. Why do they have to take every stand now?
The stand is against discrimination, which both laws basically legalize. I see it as exactly the same.
It might be the same. It's their stand to take. It's their prerogative to be inconsistent, consistent, active or silent. This sudden expectation that because they took one stand, they must now take all stands (lest they be hypocrites) is ridiculous. If you draw the logic out, it essentially supports apathy always. (so the maxim would go: "if you act once, you must act always. If you act once and not always, then you're a hypocrite and shouldn't act at all.")
People are hypocritical all the time and progress is often inconsistently sought and fought for. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do something sometimes. The world is too complex to demand complete consistency.
They cancelled a show. It sucked for a lot of fans. It was their choice to make.
Move on already.
i totally disagree... this is the same exact issue in a border state... this isn't a different issue in a different are of the world... this would not be a different stand, this would be acting in solidarity and containing to take a stand on that one issue... they threw their hat in the ring for this fight, a righteous fight, now I believe it is their responsibility to help see this fight through to the end. I don't give a shit how much they got paid to play Bonnaroo, peoples civil rights are far more important, and I believe that is exactly why they canceled Raleigh
that's the problem with todays society, they think by sending 1 tweet or filling out a petition is all they need to do to bring change and they move on the next day... North Carolina was not the start of this issue and it will not be the end of this issue... just canceling 1 concert in North Carolina did not all of the sudden make the LGBT community whole, so to speak, or end the struggle... women's suffrage and the black civil rights battle took place across the entire country for years, the civil rights movement had to fight in every corner of the south for YEARS, not just a random Wednesday in Raleigh North Carolina...
you cant be neutral on a moving train...
We might not disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that it is their stand to take. They don't have to also be your politics. The insistence that their own politics be consistent is not anyone's call to make but theirs.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1
that's the problem with todays society, they think by sending 1 tweet or filling out a petition is all they need to do to bring change and they move on the next day... North Carolina was not the start of this issue and it will not be the end of this issue... just canceling 1 concert in North Carolina did not all of the sudden make the LGBT community whole, so to speak, or end the struggle... women's suffrage and the black civil rights battle took place across the entire country for years, the civil rights movement had to fight in every corner of the south for YEARS, not just a random Wednesday in Raleigh North Carolina...
you cant be neutral on a moving train...
By your logic, if you give a homeless family a couple dollars one time, you better give every homeless family you ever come across the same amount, otherwise your action was pointless. By your logic, if you donate to an Animal Rights group, you better donate to every single Animal Rights group, or else you should have never donated to any at all. By your logic, if you stand up for an issue you care about in one place, you better spend all of your time and money standing up for it in every place, otherwise your protest is invalid.
If the world actually followed your logic, no important fights for change would ever take place because it's far too much to ask for anybody to do everything, everywhere and all the time for a cause that he/she supports.
That doesn't negate the impact that a single action makes. If you think that Pearl Jam's decision to cancel in North Carolina had no impact on the movement as a whole, do a Google News search for "Pearl Jam North Carolina" and explain how 900 articles on the topic inspired absolutely no awareness of discussion across the nation.
you are making extreme examples to fit your agenda...
I support LGBT rights, and everyone else's civil rights, 24/7 365 days of the year no matter what state/country I am in... so yes, you should be consistent if you believe in an issue... I have chosen a career that helps people, and I will remain in this career for the rest of my life because I believe in what I do... i'm not saying Pearl Jam needs to dedicate the rest of their career to the LGBT civil rights issue, as you would like to make it to be with your extreme examples, but it just so happens that they are playing a concert in a state that has passed a terrible discriminatory law, so they are in a position to take action if its still on the books in June... we are talking about cancelling 1 headlining appearance, not canceling a career as you would like to make it out to be
using your "logic" people in the other 49 states should not have given a rats ass when Rosa Parks sat on the front of the bus... or using your "logic" the rest of the civil rights movement in every other city and state should have folded up shop after the march from Selma to Montgomery... maybe the first lunch counter sit-in would have been enough? why show solidarity?
maybe them cancelling Raleigh made you feel all warm and fuzzy about your favorite band inside and you think they played their part... that's fine.... but anybody thinking this fight starts and ends in the state of North Carolina is mistaken... pearl jam decided to be part of the fight, which is fine, but now you have to see the fight through the 12 rounds it is scheduled for...
21st century political action = sending a tweet and moving on
For what it's worth, do you want them to cancel Bonarroo because it would make a political impact, or because you want to hold their proverbial feet to the fire to make a point about how Raleigh was handled? I really hope it's the former...
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1
Ignore that last question. I do hope you're sincere, but I saw your answer in another post.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1
why should a boycott to support LGBT rights have to abide by state borders? NC residents should be punished because of their jackass governor, but Tennessee shouldn't? the LGBT community in North Carolina is worth supporting, but those in Tennessee are not?
and i'm not just talking about liberal rock bands boycotting, im talking about the much larger boycott that is taking place that they became a part of... I think the boycott should spread to every state that passes these heinous laws... but maybe you guys think the struggle is over because PJ pulled the plug on 1 show? lol
I love how everybody's tune changes when it is the mighty Music & Arts Festival Bonnaroo
pearl jam canceled... they got my attention... I am fully aware of the issue and support it... so I want to see this band stick through the entire fight, just not round 1 in North Carolina
when people see other states getting boycotted, perhaps the next state/governor will be hesitant to pass such laws... this is how this shit works folks
do you really want change, or do you just want to grandstand to feel good about yourself?
Your own post pretty much summarizes every reason why I take issue with your arguments.
a) You seem to be assuming that those supporting the band wish for them to not cancel Bonnaroo. That may be true of some, but I don't see that as the prevailing idea here. I, for one, would be happy if they do cancel the festival; if they asked me to decide for them, I would decide in favor of canceling. However, they clearly would never ask me, because it's not my place to decide what actions they take or what statements they make. And that's pretty much the entirety of my argument (and, I think, many who disagree with you): the band has the right to protest (or not to protest) in any way they wish. They don't have to boycott every state with discriminatory laws just because you claim that to be the best action to take. The band has the right to cancel shows when they feel doing so will make the statement they wish to make, and to not cancel shows when they feel like there is a better way to use their influence. Frankly, it's completely self-righteous of you to insist upon the band doing what you would do, and calling them out as hypocrites for not doing so. Just as you have the right to protest however you wish, so does the band. The fact that they are famous doesn't deprive them of that right.
b) " but maybe you guys think the struggle is over because PJ pulled the plug on 1 show? lol" ... "pearl jam canceled... they got my attention... I am fully aware of the issue and support it"
I haven't seen a single person here claim or even infer that the struggle is over. lol
But, as your own statement emphasizes, pulling the plug on 1 show has made a difference. It has brought awareness that wouldn't have come about (at least not as powerfully) for many without them making the decision that they did to cancel. That, in and of itself, made the decision a good and successful one. Let's be honest, Pearl Jam cancelling their entire tour wouldn't be enough to change the law on its own, not even close. But they chose to contribute to a movement, and it has clearly made an impact. Your suggestion that they should now cancel every show in a state with a similar law is, once again, implying that what you would do and how you feel about the issue should be what the band does and how the band feels. And, again, there's nothing more self-righteous than that.
c) do you really want change, or do you just want to grandstand to feel good about yourself?
Grandstanding seems to be your thing here. I asked in another post in this thread what you have done to support the LGBT movement, and other causes you support, and have yet to hear an answer. But you know what? It doesn't really matter. I have no problem with you doing what you want or feeling as you do about certain issues, just as I have no problem with the band doing the same. And that's the whole point here -- it's awesome that you support causes you believe in, it's awesome that you wish to follow through with your support, but it's absurd to call the band out for not doing things exactly as you claim you would do them. It would be a different story if Pearl Jam suddenly decided to announce their support of anti-LGBT groups, but that clearly isn't the case. They'll continue their support in whichever ways they decide are best for them, as individuals and as a collective group. Nobody really has a right to say that they don't care or to question the authenticity of their support just because they make decisions that are different from your own.
Post edited by walkunafraid on
Everything has chains...Absolutely nothing's changed. - PJ
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” - Albert Camus
What "precedent" was set? They took a stand on one issue. Why do they have to take every stand now?
The stand is against discrimination, which both laws basically legalize. I see it as exactly the same.
It might be the same. It's their stand to take. It's their prerogative to be inconsistent, consistent, active or silent. This sudden expectation that because they took one stand, they must now take all stands (lest they be hypocrites) is ridiculous. If you draw the logic out, it essentially supports apathy always. (so the maxim would go: "if you act once, you must act always. If you act once and not always, then you're a hypocrite and shouldn't act at all.")
People are hypocritical all the time and progress is often inconsistently sought and fought for. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do something sometimes. The world is too complex to demand complete consistency.
They cancelled a show. It sucked for a lot of fans. It was their choice to make.
Move on already.
i totally disagree... this is the same exact issue in a border state... this isn't a different issue in a different are of the world... this would not be a different stand, this would be acting in solidarity and containing to take a stand on that one issue... they threw their hat in the ring for this fight, a righteous fight, now I believe it is their responsibility to help see this fight through to the end. I don't give a shit how much they got paid to play Bonnaroo, peoples civil rights are far more important, and I believe that is exactly why they canceled Raleigh
that's the problem with todays society, they think by sending 1 tweet or filling out a petition is all they need to do to bring change and they move on the next day... North Carolina was not the start of this issue and it will not be the end of this issue... just canceling 1 concert in North Carolina did not all of the sudden make the LGBT community whole, so to speak, or end the struggle... women's suffrage and the black civil rights battle took place across the entire country for years, the civil rights movement had to fight in every corner of the south for YEARS, not just a random Wednesday in Raleigh North Carolina...
you cant be neutral on a moving train...
We might not disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that it is their stand to take. They don't have to also be your politics. The insistence that their own politics be consistent is not anyone's call to make but theirs.
Who said any different? Of course it's their decision... I'm also allowed to be interested in their decision and disagree or disagree when that decision is made... especially as a paying consumer that loves this band
It's their decision to play Sirens, it's my decision whether I like it or not lol
that's the problem with todays society, they think by sending 1 tweet or filling out a petition is all they need to do to bring change and they move on the next day... North Carolina was not the start of this issue and it will not be the end of this issue... just canceling 1 concert in North Carolina did not all of the sudden make the LGBT community whole, so to speak, or end the struggle... women's suffrage and the black civil rights battle took place across the entire country for years, the civil rights movement had to fight in every corner of the south for YEARS, not just a random Wednesday in Raleigh North Carolina...
you cant be neutral on a moving train...
By your logic, if you give a homeless family a couple dollars one time, you better give every homeless family you ever come across the same amount, otherwise your action was pointless. By your logic, if you donate to an Animal Rights group, you better donate to every single Animal Rights group, or else you should have never donated to any at all. By your logic, if you stand up for an issue you care about in one place, you better spend all of your time and money standing up for it in every place, otherwise your protest is invalid.
If the world actually followed your logic, no important fights for change would ever take place because it's far too much to ask for anybody to do everything, everywhere and all the time for a cause that he/she supports.
That doesn't negate the impact that a single action makes. If you think that Pearl Jam's decision to cancel in North Carolina had no impact on the movement as a whole, do a Google News search for "Pearl Jam North Carolina" and explain how 900 articles on the topic inspired absolutely no awareness of discussion across the nation.
you are making extreme examples to fit your agenda...
I support LGBT rights, and everyone else's civil rights, 24/7 365 days of the year no matter what state/country I am in... so yes, you should be consistent if you believe in an issue... I have chosen a career that helps people, and I will remain in this career for the rest of my life because I believe in what I do... i'm not saying Pearl Jam needs to dedicate the rest of their career to the LGBT civil rights issue, as you would like to make it to be with your extreme examples, but it just so happens that they are playing a concert in a state that has passed a terrible discriminatory law, so they are in a position to take action if its still on the books in June... we are talking about cancelling 1 headlining appearance, not canceling a career as you would like to make it out to be
using your "logic" people in the other 49 states should not have given a rats ass when Rosa Parks sat on the front of the bus... or using your "logic" the rest of the civil rights movement in every other city and state should have folded up shop after the march from Selma to Montgomery... maybe the first lunch counter sit-in would have been enough? why show solidarity?
maybe them cancelling Raleigh made you feel all warm and fuzzy about your favorite band inside and you think they played their part... that's fine.... but anybody thinking this fight starts and ends in the state of North Carolina is mistaken... pearl jam decided to be part of the fight, which is fine, but now you have to see the fight through the 12 rounds it is scheduled for...
21st century political action = sending a tweet and moving on
For what it's worth, do you want them to cancel Bonarroo because it would make a political impact, or because you want to hold their proverbial feet to the fire to make a point about how Raleigh was handled? I really hope it's the former...
To be completely honest, I would say it is both...
I had Raleigh tix... I was traveling to see them... I felt they canceled too late... but I support the cause 100% and have no issue with the reasoning behind the cancelation, just the late timing... so the way I see it, they just pushed all their chips in the middle of the table and can't fold now when this issue is spreading like wildfire during a presidential election year
This reeks of Karl Rove using gay marriage as a wedge issue at the polls in 2004 to help re-elect that fucking moron George W
I don't ever want pearl jam to cancel a concert, trust me it sucks lol, but if there is no progress on the issue by june and the boycott spreads to Tennessee, or wherever, then i believe they should stand in solidarity as they did in North Carolina
Just to add another dimension to this...as someone else pointed out, while the target is the same, and the inherent motive is equally dispicable, the potential impact of this law on the lgbt community is significantly less than the NC law. This Tennessee law seems more of a push from the crowd that holds the false notion that Christianity is under attack from liberals and homosexuals to gain a moral victory against progress. Any respectable psychologist isn't going to have a problem consulting lgbt anyway, and any lgbt seeking help is probably not going to insist on speaking to some bigot who doesn't understand them anyway. This isn't state mandated descrimination. Its kind of like a preacher not wanting to marry a gay couple. Im sure the gay couple wouldn't want the bigot at their wedding anyway, let alone marry them. So while I disagree with the legislation, and it's inherent motive is equally ignorant, let's not pretend that this is exactly the same as the NC law. It's really not.
Hateful and wrong, yes. Equally as dangerous for civil rights, not really. So not exactly hypocritical to take a strong stand against one and not the other.
Pearl Jam made the logic behind the NC cancellation clear the day they did it in Hampton. Paraphrasing Eddie Vedder, 'there was a picket line, and we didn't feel like we could cross it'.
I think it's as simple as that agree with it or not. Im sure Pearl Jam is equally disgusted with the Tennessee law as many of us are. The difference is there is not an active boycott going on against the state. Could Pearl Jam lead that charge? Sure. Just not sure a Bonnaroo gig is a wise show to cancel to start that charge. The festival would go on, the economic impact would be zero, and Pearl Jam would be the only ones paying the price. Yes it would be commendable of them to cancel, and it could lead to a larger boycott of the state, but I think expecting them to do so is a bit unfair given the circumstances.
You're right.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Proud gay Tennessean here without tickets to Bonnaroo. I boycotted Roo for stealing my Bridgestone Arena show. I choose not to live for days in 3rd world conditions to catch a show. Same reason I didn't try for rail in Jacksonville when I was in GA. As some have stated already... This counseling law, though discriminatory, could be a good thing actually. If they took it one step further and made Counselors publicly share any particular bias they have. It could keep someone from getting further messed up by fundamentalist head shrinkers. I hit a low point about 12 years ago and had a suicide attempt (I'm gay. We love drama, right?) and while unconscious I was transported to Tennessee Christian Medical Center (which is thankfully now defunct) while there the time with the counselor was very brief. As soon as I disclosed that I was gay the counselor wanted to pray with/for me rather than listen to me. I basically got my stomach pumped, got a good scolding and then sent to the state mental health ward for observation. Anyone who is in mental healthcare and has a bias toward lgbtq should not be allowed to practice as a healthcare professional. If they want to give spiritual guidance that's one thing but to actually call them a healthcare professional is a misnomer. As an aside: a few weeks later I received a thank you letter for choosing Tennessee Christian. I struggled at the time but now the humor is not lost on me that I was basically thanked for attempting suicide.
Proud gay Tennessean here without tickets to Bonnaroo. I boycotted Roo for stealing my Bridgestone Arena show. I choose not to live for days in 3rd world conditions to catch a show. Same reason I didn't try for rail in Jacksonville when I was in GA. As some have stated already... This counseling law, though discriminatory, could be a good thing actually. If they took it one step further and made Counselors publicly share any particular bias they have. It could keep someone from getting further messed up by fundamentalist head shrinkers. I hit a low point about 12 years ago and had a suicide attempt (I'm gay. We love drama, right?) and while unconscious I was transported to Tennessee Christian Medical Center (which is thankfully now defunct) while there the time with the counselor was very brief. As soon as I disclosed that I was gay the counselor wanted to pray with/for me rather than listen to me. I basically got my stomach pumped, got a good scolding and then sent to the state mental health ward for observation. Anyone who is in mental healthcare and has a bias toward lgbtq should not be allowed to practice as a healthcare professional. If they want to give spiritual guidance that's one thing but to actually call them a healthcare professional is a misnomer. As an aside: a few weeks later I received a thank you letter for choosing Tennessee Christian. I struggled at the time but now the humor is not lost on me that I was basically thanked for attempting suicide.
Glad you made it through that. Stay strong!
Columbia 2008 Atlanta 2012 Wrigley 2013 Charlotte 2013 Seattle 2013 Memphis 2014 Greenville (VS.) 2016 Columbia 2016 New Orleans 2016 Fenway I 2016 Fenway II 2016 Wrigley I 2016 Wrigley II 2016
Thanks @CapnBob I have matured a lot and learned coping skills. Life is much better now. I have support systems in place and I have a sense of worth.... And a record collection full of Pearl Jam music for the rougher times.
That's very great to hear @OceansMagnet .. The Pearl Jam music that helps us is what makes them so awesome!
Columbia 2008 Atlanta 2012 Wrigley 2013 Charlotte 2013 Seattle 2013 Memphis 2014 Greenville (VS.) 2016 Columbia 2016 New Orleans 2016 Fenway I 2016 Fenway II 2016 Wrigley I 2016 Wrigley II 2016
Comments
I think it's as simple as that agree with it or not. Im sure Pearl Jam is equally disgusted with the Tennessee law as many of us are. The difference is there is not an active boycott going on against the state. Could Pearl Jam lead that charge? Sure. Just not sure a Bonnaroo gig is a wise show to cancel to start that charge. The festival would go on, the economic impact would be zero, and Pearl Jam would be the only ones paying the price. Yes it would be commendable of them to cancel, and it could lead to a larger boycott of the state, but I think expecting them to do so is a bit unfair given the circumstances.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/secretary-of-state-her-staff-to-skip-tennessee-meeting/
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
a) You seem to be assuming that those supporting the band wish for them to not cancel Bonnaroo. That may be true of some, but I don't see that as the prevailing idea here. I, for one, would be happy if they do cancel the festival; if they asked me to decide for them, I would decide in favor of canceling. However, they clearly would never ask me, because it's not my place to decide what actions they take or what statements they make. And that's pretty much the entirety of my argument (and, I think, many who disagree with you): the band has the right to protest (or not to protest) in any way they wish. They don't have to boycott every state with discriminatory laws just because you claim that to be the best action to take. The band has the right to cancel shows when they feel doing so will make the statement they wish to make, and to not cancel shows when they feel like there is a better way to use their influence. Frankly, it's completely self-righteous of you to insist upon the band doing what you would do, and calling them out as hypocrites for not doing so. Just as you have the right to protest however you wish, so does the band. The fact that they are famous doesn't deprive them of that right.
b) " but maybe you guys think the struggle is over because PJ pulled the plug on 1 show? lol" ... "pearl jam canceled... they got my attention... I am fully aware of the issue and support it"
I haven't seen a single person here claim or even infer that the struggle is over. lol
But, as your own statement emphasizes, pulling the plug on 1 show has made a difference. It has brought awareness that wouldn't have come about (at least not as powerfully) for many without them making the decision that they did to cancel. That, in and of itself, made the decision a good and successful one. Let's be honest, Pearl Jam cancelling their entire tour wouldn't be enough to change the law on its own, not even close. But they chose to contribute to a movement, and it has clearly made an impact. Your suggestion that they should now cancel every show in a state with a similar law is, once again, implying that what you would do and how you feel about the issue should be what the band does and how the band feels. And, again, there's nothing more self-righteous than that.
c) do you really want change, or do you just want to grandstand to feel good about yourself?
Grandstanding seems to be your thing here. I asked in another post in this thread what you have done to support the LGBT movement, and other causes you support, and have yet to hear an answer. But you know what? It doesn't really matter. I have no problem with you doing what you want or feeling as you do about certain issues, just as I have no problem with the band doing the same. And that's the whole point here -- it's awesome that you support causes you believe in, it's awesome that you wish to follow through with your support, but it's absurd to call the band out for not doing things exactly as you claim you would do them. It would be a different story if Pearl Jam suddenly decided to announce their support of anti-LGBT groups, but that clearly isn't the case. They'll continue their support in whichever ways they decide are best for them, as individuals and as a collective group. Nobody really has a right to say that they don't care or to question the authenticity of their support just because they make decisions that are different from your own.
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” - Albert Camus
It's their decision to play Sirens, it's my decision whether I like it or not lol
I had Raleigh tix... I was traveling to see them... I felt they canceled too late... but I support the cause 100% and have no issue with the reasoning behind the cancelation, just the late timing... so the way I see it, they just pushed all their chips in the middle of the table and can't fold now when this issue is spreading like wildfire during a presidential election year
This reeks of Karl Rove using gay marriage as a wedge issue at the polls in 2004 to help re-elect that fucking moron George W
I don't ever want pearl jam to cancel a concert, trust me it sucks lol, but if there is no progress on the issue by june and the boycott spreads to Tennessee, or wherever, then i believe they should stand in solidarity as they did in North Carolina
Just to add another dimension to this...as someone else pointed out, while the target is the same, and the inherent motive is equally dispicable, the potential impact of this law on the lgbt community is significantly less than the NC law. This Tennessee law seems more of a push from the crowd that holds the false notion that Christianity is under attack from liberals and homosexuals to gain a moral victory against progress. Any respectable psychologist isn't going to have a problem consulting lgbt anyway, and any lgbt seeking help is probably not going to insist on speaking to some bigot who doesn't understand them anyway. This isn't state mandated descrimination. Its kind of like a preacher not wanting to marry a gay couple. Im sure the gay couple wouldn't want the bigot at their wedding anyway, let alone marry them. So while I disagree with the legislation, and it's inherent motive is equally ignorant, let's not pretend that this is exactly the same as the NC law. It's really not.
Hateful and wrong, yes. Equally as dangerous for civil rights, not really. So not exactly hypocritical to take a strong stand against one and not the other.
Atlanta 2012
Wrigley 2013
Charlotte 2013
Seattle 2013
Memphis 2014
Greenville (VS.) 2016
Columbia 2016
New Orleans 2016
Fenway I 2016
Fenway II 2016
Wrigley I 2016
Wrigley II 2016
Atlanta 2012
Wrigley 2013
Charlotte 2013
Seattle 2013
Memphis 2014
Greenville (VS.) 2016
Columbia 2016
New Orleans 2016
Fenway I 2016
Fenway II 2016
Wrigley I 2016
Wrigley II 2016