[Ultra Sonic 007]

Did any of you read the article? The only thing I can see where the studio is trying to portray Superman as a homosexual (not from websites, blogs, or magazines) is how WB bought advertising time on Logo...and even that's stretching it a bit.

This is just a case of homosexuals trying to taint one of America's icons. I don't think the people in the studio would have Superman be a homosexual if they knew what was good for them.

[bpjam]

If you could see the ads that they run on the gay channels and in gay magazines, you would clearly get the impression that this was a gay movie. The studios (who are chock full of them) are seemingly more desparate to get gay men to see movies than they are men 18-54 like every other advertiser. The studios know exactly what is being said and promoted on this movie and they aren't protesting anything on the gay side - intentionally. They can't just come out and plant articles that say that Superman is now gay but they could have killed some of the stories that did run or at least object to them in print - which they also don't do. A cover story of Advocate mag pre-movie release isn't an accident, its a promo planted by the studio brass.

When you saw the three thousand commercials on TV for brokeback mountain, did you see any scenes in it which looked gay if you hadn't already known that it was about gay guys pretending to be cowboys?? Not a chance since the strategy was to trick the public into thinking this was a western. But on the gay media and throughout the gay activity networks it was as organized a campaign as the DNC and moron.org hosting viewing parties for Michael Moore films. There is absolutely no ambiguity about the agenda. But they can't come out and tell people what they are doing.