Entry tags:
Fun stuff
Link of the day, courtesy of
trollprincess.
It's your typical Levitican homophobic bile, made a million times more entertaining with one line: "The young ladies who are fans of Gyllenhaal and Ledger do not want to see them making out."
I'd wager that "Jared" does not have much contact with young heterosexual women, because I'm quite sure that this isn't true. Granted, I have no statistics to back me up, but I think most "young ladies" would want to see that. (If you're wondering, I saw the trailer in the company of a (mostly) heterosexual gentleman, neither of us knowing what it was about. Neither of us were particularly inclined to see it based on the trailer, but we both agreed that Gyllenhaal and Ledger looked very pretty together.)
The cowardly wanker has now turned off comments. Awww. You can still continue to flame his colleague, in a post defending the original post, not that I would ever encourage such behaviour.
[Poll #628255]
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
It's your typical Levitican homophobic bile, made a million times more entertaining with one line: "The young ladies who are fans of Gyllenhaal and Ledger do not want to see them making out."
I'd wager that "Jared" does not have much contact with young heterosexual women, because I'm quite sure that this isn't true. Granted, I have no statistics to back me up, but I think most "young ladies" would want to see that. (If you're wondering, I saw the trailer in the company of a (mostly) heterosexual gentleman, neither of us knowing what it was about. Neither of us were particularly inclined to see it based on the trailer, but we both agreed that Gyllenhaal and Ledger looked very pretty together.)
The cowardly wanker has now turned off comments. Awww. You can still continue to flame his colleague, in a post defending the original post, not that I would ever encourage such behaviour.
[Poll #628255]
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
" by and large Americans -- blue state, red state, Christian and non -- innately find homosexuality repulsive."
He should quickly pull the girly mags out from under his bed and reconsider his bullshit for a moment.
Wow - so sad the post is closed.
Too bad he didn't save himself some time and just write "I'm a scared little dumbfuck" and then post that shit.
and more points off for the Pulp fiction and seinfeld references.
no subject
He admitted in one of the comments that he doesn't "innately" find female homosexuality repulsive -- he just finds it repulsive because it's a "sin." (It isn't. Not even according to his Bible's rules.) It really lends weight to the "scared little dumbfuck" theory.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
Frankly, the gay cowboy film is not "yucky" so much as risible. I saw its first previews before "The Constant Gardener," whose audience was far to the left, and the sounds of laughter and loud chuckles permeated the theater as soon as the premise was introduced. These people were not repulsed by the homoerotic scenes so much as amused by the campiness of the juxtaposition of gay and cowboy themes. It's campy because the gay cowboys are Village People, not vanguards of civil rights, they lampoon the images of male masculinity. So the reaction of these people was to the premise not, as Jared suggests, to the anal sex.
Seriously, you have to be very bored or very reactionary to go around looking for essentialist critiques for the highly superficial phenomena of pop culture. See my icon, if you don't believe me.
no subject
Yes - I absolutely had a bit of a "yuck factor" reaction to the preview - but it was the cowboys that bring that out in me.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Here is my two cents...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
You could be right. Then again, there have been a number of obscure blogs wherein someone has made some dumb remark and the next thing you know, it's all over teh intarwebs.
I saw the preview before "Paradise Now," so I'd also presume that the audience mostly kicked with the left boot. The snickering seemed to be geared more to very bad dialogue than anything else.
Also, heh. Buttsex.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
How's about this one?
Re: How's about this one?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
Hey, you didn't respond to my Rush reference the other day! What gives?
no subject
no subject
I love how Jared's ideas about gay sex are basically are rape scenarios. What a dumbass.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Do they eat pudding, too?
no subject
The term Levitican was coined by John Scalzi. Spread it far.
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Speaking of closet cases, click on this and watch the segment "Gays of Thunder."
Do "ex-gays" still count as closet cases?
no subject
Also, anything that mentions NASCAR is guaranteed hilarity for me, but NASCAR plus ex-gays? You've just made my evening!
Ex-gays = so far in the closet, they're in Narnia.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2005-12-07 00:15 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Of course, as a straight, male kinkster, I'd rather see his sister get spanked again.
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
"Janeane Garofalo & Thora Birch with their nerd glasses on.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)