Posted on 02/27/2006 2:46:01 PM PST by prman
Considering the current hoo-hah over the movie "Brokeback Mountain" and whether it will win any Academy Awards brings into focus what the appeal of this movie might be for straights – heterosexual persons, that is.
While I am aware that there is a larger context for this movie in the social arena – a serious dramatic treatment of homosexual love – and that gay advocacy groups consider this another victory in their agenda to break barriers and normalize homosexuality, my personal reaction is to question why I would want to see a movie on this theme.
Because of the strength of the gay lobby and the widespread, stifling political correctness that inhibits frank public discussion about homosexual lifestyles, people who happen to disagree with the prospect of gay marriage, civil unions, employer- or taxpayer-sponsored health insurance for gay partners, or even gay pride marches generally do not receive any attention in the media. As a result, they keep their thoughts to themselves.
Now that Hollywood movies and television shows are officially "gay-friendly," and certain corporations bruit about how they are targeting the gay market in their advertising, and even metropolitan newspapers carry obligatory op-ed columns by gay and lesbian writers, contrary views are relegated to the mouths of fundamentalist Bible-thumpers who are routinely dismissed by the mainstream media.
Any criticism of gayness, reasonable or not, is judged as homophobic, a word that is as ridiculously meaningless (fear of man?) as it is knee-jerk. Many people, usually guilt-ridden liberals, fear being called this, since they equate it with the same force as being called a racist.
My speculation is that straights, even in their silence on the issue, still regard homosexuality as wrong, deviant and against nature. And all religions not revisionist consider it sinful. Further, they believe that widespread acceptance of homosexual behavior is a bad thing.
I am not saying homosexuals qua homosexuals are bad, only the practice of having sex with another of the same sex. Straights most likely also believe that gay practices should be private, not public, matters. Which is why the idea of gay days at Disney World, bathhouses and flamboyant gay pride marches in San Francisco is so repellent.
Several gay columnists have commended "Brokeback Mountain" because it wrestles with the issues that confront two men who love each other, yet find themselves overwhelmed by a straight society that generally disapproves. The writers identify with the emotional turmoil of the characters because, we must assume, they have gone through this themselves.
But that gets to the heart of the question. As a hetero, how can I identify with this situation? More importantly, why would I want to? I care no more about the love life of homosexuals than I do about the mating habits of aardvarks or why female praying mantises bite the heads off their male suitors. While these may be interesting as points of study, they have no relevance to my life.
As a straight guy, I want to be able to identify with characters who have a normal libido and show passion toward the opposite, not the same, sex. Becoming emotionally wound up with two male lovers just isn't in the cards, and I venture to say that most straight people feel the same way. And this attitude transcends politics, rights or social controversies. It's hard-wired into our beings.
In college, when I was younger, thinner and boyish-looking, gays from the music school – organists, violinists, pianists – were always trying to convert me to accept or even join their lifestyles. They assumed that a young "chicken" like myself was in some sexual identity confusion that could be solidified by more exposure to the homo life.
In a way, they were right, because when I went to a gay party and saw all these guys dancing together and fondling one another, I had to avert my gaze, feeling a wave of disgust that still reverberates today.
Today, the media serve up caricatures of gays, from comic sitcom characters to snooty, style-conscious, queer-eye types, in an attempt to make them more acceptable to straights. This may work on a surface level, but it is misleading.
In my experience, gays don't think like straights do. They're in a totally different world in their desires, their thinking, their reactions and their very being. No matter what laws are passed or what additional "rights" are claimed, the gay life is fundamentally at odds with straight experience. I do not feel comfortable in their world.
Barrett Kalellis is a Michigan-based columnist and writer whose articles appear regularly in various local and national print and online publications. He may be reached at kalellis@newsmax.com.
Yeh, go to yer local H-D and tell a few bikers they're gay. You are likely to become a grease spot on the pavement.
I agree... but where have you ever heard pedophilia can be "cured" (other than with a rope and a tree branch)?
There's a REASON homosexual males (at least in San Francsico) chose that look...
Actually, gay pride marches EVERYWHERE offend me, I was just agreeing with the general message of that paragraph.
Surely you haven't missed the recent news stories about pedophiles who were given reduced sentences because the justices involed wanted the to go right into counseling so that they could be rehabilitated?
I don't recall the story off the top of my head... but it seems that rope can be for more than only pedophiles (if need be).
Another problem of the homos is that their straight families often really suffer. A neighbor's youngest son went homo suddenly and his whole family is beyond suffering. The boy moved to another state, and entered the gay bar scene big time. He has since tried suicide twice and is the unhappiest person imaginable, so say his parents. Inevitable depression is a potential result of that choice.
In that case, I could recommend some judges to keep the child-touchers company.
They are trying to do far more than that. With this movie,
they are trying to desensitize one's aversion to this type
of behavior. When discussing this movie, there is never any mention of the lives destroyed in the story: the wives and
children.
Why do so many men like to either fantasize, witness or become involved in lesbian sex, yet women are mostly disgusted by the thought of two men having sex?
Is lesbianism more natural (and acceptable) than male homosexuality?
And if people can be born "gay", why can't they be born "smokers"?
Well, apparently you CAN be born an alchoholic these days. Nothing is anybody's fault these days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.