Posted on 02/02/2006 8:23:21 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
Given that it's Oscar time, I nominate the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for Best Bunch of Hypocrites. That’s because this year’s dirty little secret is the anecdotal evidence pouring in to me about hetero members being unwilling to screen Brokeback Mountain. For a community that takes pride in progressive values, it’s shameful that Hollywood’s homophobia may be on a par with Pat Robertson’s.
Despite the hype you’re reading in the press and on the Internet about Brokeback, with its eight nominations, being the supposed favorite to take home the Best Picture Oscar on March 5, Crash could end up winning. The issue isn’t which film is better. The issue is more like which movie was seen by the Academy. Frankly, I find horrifying each whispered admission to me from Academy members who usually pose as social liberals that they’re disgusted by even the possibility of glimpsing simulated gay sex. Earth to the easily offended: This movie has been criticized for being too sexually tame. Hey, Academy, what are you worried about: that you’ll turn gay or, worse, get a stiffie by just the hint of hunk-on-hunk action?
(Excerpt) Read more at laweekly.com ...
Of course it's been criticized as such. People with consciences that are seared seek more debauchery and then seek to normalize that. It is defining deviancy down.
Ha! That's what the Oscars need: a Busby Berkeley style musical number, with hollywood celebs all singing "Oscar's Song".
Oh, I love trash!
Anything dirty or dingy or dusty!
Anything rotten or rancid or rusty!
That's Super, thanks for asking!
Sorry - not interested in watching nor supporting homosexual sodomy. These people are sick and I will never "tolerate" their behavior.
Oh, and enough about raising money for AIDS. Just stop gay sex and the disease will decline rapidly. Stop stealing my tax dollars to cure it.
I am amazed when I read these articles how out of touch people like Nikki are. She thinks only a few people on the far right are offended by the garbage coming from Hollywood. They're so insulated in their bubble that they don't understand how intolerant THEY are of other points of view. This article reeks of intolerance of non gay-loving people, and yet she accuses others of not being tolerant just because she's sees that her values have not been successfully shoved down the throat of every person out there. So insulated are they that when people do speak up, Hollywood is always shocked by the backlash. It's similar to how shocked they are every time a George W is elected, even though they don't know a single person who voted for him!
"Sodomy On the Range".
ROTFLMAO !!
I've been call ing it BareA$$ed Mountain here on FR and Bu**$lammer Montain at home. But I really like "Sodomy on the Range".
Rumor has it they've changed the name from "Oscar" to "Bruce." And I heard they revamped the statue to resemble a miniature version of the one commissioned by Elagabalus in the 3rd century.
I would rather "Bareback Mount Me" won rather than the self-hating Israel bash "Munich".
The awards have always been political. The only thing that has changed is the politics.
This thing is beginning to remind me of the plot of The Producers. Hey, what if we tried to make an Oscars show that was a total flop!
.JPG)
Not this:
He's a grouch that lives in a trash can.
Here's the problem with Brokeback - it's a thinly veiled effort to get gay porn on the big screen and the MSM and Hollyweirdos are buying it.
First, let's examine the basic storyline. The two sheepherders end up in a shack together seeking shelter from a bitterly cold storm. So far, so good. Then, not finding any way to generate heat, they climb into the single bed together and share the one blankey. Under the circumstances, it's still reasonable. No harm, no foul.
But, this is where the fatal flaw comes in. It's so bitterly cold, that the two sheepherders decide that the best way to stay warm is to get naked and have sex. HELLO!!!
Any guy (and a LOT of women) know what happens to the wee willie winky when it is bitterly cold out. No matter how willing the spirit, the flesh ain't comin' to attention. This flaw, then, makes it undeniably clear that the whole purpose (I was about to say 'thrust', then decided it lacked taste) of the film is to get gay porn on the big screen.
Paul Rubens (AKA Pee Wee Herman) may have enjoyed the film, but it's a huge turnoff to mainstream America - the part of the country that Hollyweird hates so much.
Oscar may be gay, but John Wayne, Roy Rogers and Audie Murphy are spinmning in their graves.
That's the nice thing about not being a liberal. I don't have to justify not wanting to watch something that creeps me out.
Earth to author - if people don't want to watch the movie, maybe there's a reason. It shouldn't be forced on them. That might create a "hostile work environment" for them or something.
Besides, what if their reaction to your little titilating experience isn't a stiffy, but an episode of projectile vomiting all over the homos in the row in front of them? They're not all necessary as flaming as you are...
I am still surprised that "Aristocrats" didn't get mentioned.
The difference in Hollywood’s reaction to “Homo on the Range” and Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” tells you everything you need to know.
Also, one small gripe concerning the replies in this thread: Although the terms are convenient, there is no such thing as “gay” sex or “homosexual” sex.
Sex, by definition, requires a male and a female.
The carnal activities of two males are a sexual perversion.
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.