that blue steel look is exhausting. Really played to death. And all the hype surrounding this is becoming exhausting in itself. How am I gonna sit through two hours of it?
come on now. If anyone had seen BORAT, they know it was a blatant attack on racist, ignorant, xenophones. There were always uncomfortable silences whenever rednecks would make nasty remarks about Jews, Muslims, gays and blacks.
remember that trailer scene with the frat douche-bags? When they were boasting how they wished slavery was still legal?
This movie will show us homophobia in a new light and force us to re-think homophobes' feelings about the LGBTQ community.
Borat worked because as a character he was amusing. Bruno on the other hand looks like shit. This movie along with Inglorious Basterds can't bomb soon enough.
I used to fast forward through the "Bruno" bits on SBC's HBO show. I thought that the character was stupid, really, and actually found both "Borat" and "Ali G" more amusing.
That said, I will probably be seeing this. And I am also a fan of Al Jolson.
"There were always uncomfortable silences whenever rednecks would make nasty remarks about Jews, Muslims, gays and blacks."
"Redneck" is technically hate speech, as is "white trash", but since you're a brown-skinned Muslim woman, I suppose that's ok.
"This movie will show us homophobia in a new light and force us to re-think homophobes' feelings about the LGBTQ community."
Drop the naive, my-first-politics hogwash. Would that this statement were actually true, but does anyone really believe Borat, or now Bruno, does anything but preach to the choir? Or, further, that it actually shows anything in a "new light"? You have to live under a pretty big rock to not have heard or experienced or seen (even in pop culture!) how homophobia sounds and feels.
This Movie will apeal to homophobes who like to laugh at stereotypical fags. I'm still more offended by President Obam a and his administration with the exception of Hillary Clinton. The reason being his adminstratuion still supports discrimination of Homosexuals in the military also he's going to issue an executive order to allow for more benefits among domestic partners but not full benefits. My partner still can't get medical benfits if I worked for the federal government. My partner can not share in my Social Security benefits like a heterosexual couple. Plus because I get medical coverage for my partner in California the federal government taxes me as if that is an income but yet my heterosexual counterparts do not have to pay taxes on their spouses medical coverage. Obama is doing nothing to undue this injustice and his justice department is blocking homosexuals from sueing to get this Equal right. So next time and for the first time I'll be voting Republican at least I know my taxes won't go up to support breeders.
This Movie will apeal to homophobes who like to laugh at stereotypical fags. I'm still more offended by President Obama and his administration with the exception of Hillary Clinton. The reason being his adminstration still supports discrimination of Homosexuals in the military also he's going to issue an executive order to allow for more benefits among domestic partners but not full benefits. My partner still can't get medical benefits if I worked for the federal government. My partner can not share in my Social Security benefits like a heterosexual couple. Plus because I get medical coverage for my partner in California the federal government taxes me as if that is an income but yet my heterosexual counterparts do not have to pay taxes on their spouses medical coverage. Obama is doing nothing to undue this injustice and his justice department is blocking homosexuals from sueing to get this Equal right. So next time and for the first time I'll be voting Republican at least I know my taxes won't go up to support breeders.
Is it just homophobes that like to laugh at stereotypical fags? Because I think they're goddamn hilarious. I had always assumed the more flambouyant ones were TRYING to be funny.
Its not meant to further a cause though it does shed light on the underlying homophobia in America. To call it "minstrel' is extreme, he's not exploiting, but rather exagerating typical behavior of a select few that have become for better or worse the poster boys for the gay community. I find it odd that people can laugh at said jokes in private in regards to their race or sexual preference but if such material is made public by an outsider than somehow it's inappropriate or their intent is questioned. Look BORAT exposed the "ugly American", the comedy came either from ignorance of others or awkwardness of socializing with the poor. I know people of ill will towards the LGBT community who wouldnt dare see this film because of the content , so yes the cause is missed, but its onlyt by those who fear facing themselves and laughing.
Posted by nodirectionhome at June 17, 2009 5:28 AM
So of course I go to CNN.com right after leaving here, and the lead story is Obama signing a memo granting bennies to same-sex partners of federal employees.
Michael don't be fooled the memo does not grant full benfits. In fact the benefits offered are minimal. Why not grant full equality? I guess it's ok to be partially bigoted? That's like the fifties in the south when blacks were allowed to ride on the same bus but still had to ride in the back. Thanks but no thanks. I want full and equal benefits.
nodirectionhome said
"To call it "minstrel' is extreme, he's not exploiting, but rather exagerating typical behavior of a select few that have become for better or worse the poster boys for the gay community. "
Why is it extreme? It is minstrel. Not only is he expoiting the homophobic images but Sacha is profiteering from it. Why not do a "Satire" of a stereotypical black family in the whitehouse. Let's see how well that goes over with the same crowd that think this movie is OK? I "betcha" the reaction would be different to say the least. Also enjoy this statistic while you watch Bruno LGBT murder rate increased to 28% this past year. HA HA. Nothings says funny than poking fun at minority group and then lynching them after. We live in a society that still says it's ok to treat a group of citizen as a second class. Obama is only holding out a carrot and not really doing anything to change this. Either he agrees with the bigotry or is too cowardly to defend a minority group.
Isn't the whole idea of Bruno is to create a character that embodies the stereotype?
The reason stereotypes are identifiable and funny is because there are truths to them.
If Bruno goes too far than what is "just right"? The queer eye guys? Richard Simmons? Tom Cruise? Who decides?
There is undeniably some comedy in the above clip. Men are speaking with feminine voices and a non geographic based accent to discuss how Bruno acts too feminine.
The whole scene is ripe for satire, not to be mocked but perhaps they are taking themselves a bit too seriously.
I don't get the outrage. Actors like Plotnick have made a (limited) career out of pushing these exact same gay stereotypes but now it's "dangerous" when a straight comic does the same thing? Perhaps there's a little professional envy going on here.
Drop the naive, my-first-politics hogwash. Would that this statement were actually true, but does anyone really believe Borat, or now Bruno, does anything but preach to the choir? Or, further, that it actually shows anything in a "new light"? You have to live under a pretty big rock to not have heard or experienced or seen (even in pop culture!) how homophobia sounds and feels.
and Borat was such a big side punch that after the effect wore off, you were more concerned with the blow then anything else.
"Also enjoy this statistic while you watch Bruno LGBT murder rate increased to 28% this past year."
Not to be flippant, but don't you mean the LGBT murder rate rose 28% last year? Because a murder rate increasing to 28% would mean more than 1 in 4 gays were killed last year.
And even then, an anti-LGBT murder rate increase of 28% stlll means gays are being killed at a lower pace than general murder per capita statistics. There were 29 anti-LGBT murders according to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report that was put out yesterday. Out of a population of four million people, that would be a murder rate of 0.00725 murders per 1000 LGBTs. Compare that to a 0.042802 per 1,000 people for the general populace, and since I took the lower number of the estimated LGBT population of the US, the LGBT murder rate per capita number would be even lower if we took the high end of the estimate (six million). So even though the anti-LGBT murder rate did rise at an alarming rate last year, LGBTs are still being murdered at a lesser rate than non-LGBTs.
EdHaven
The past year is last year. The murder rate was specific to what they were which is being a member of the LGBT community. But I Ilike how you want to mitigate this fact that sure it's OK to kill a few people because they are part of this community. After all it's only a few of them. But you forget they only make up less than 10% of the population and it should never be OK to kill someone because of their sexual orientation. Again thats the problem people like you can excuse this type of discrimination even when murder is involved.
Todd, I think you missed every point EdHaven tried to make. Seriously. Read his post again. If you choose not to, I think you should at least know that his post didn't excuse any discrimination, it just pointed out that, statistically speaking, LGBTs are actually safer from murder than non-LGBTs. Also, you make the assumption that every LGBT was murdered BECAUSE they were an LGBT, which I don't think we can accurately assert without specific information about each case. After all, I'm sure at least some of those LGBTs were murdered by fellow LGBTs, no?
The LGBT murder static pertains not to all the LGBT mudered last year but the number who were mudered in high profile ways because they were of that sexual orientation. Such as this teenager http://freethinkers.groups.vox.com/library/link/6a00cd9721fedb4cd500e398e2ecd30005.html
But let's poke fun of the second class citizens after all they are less than equal and some of them behave very funny like.Why not kill a few of them for being different.
Ghost072 I did not miss any of his points he is mitigating the issue that people are murdered in this country because they are gay. The statistics that he points to are a mismatched mix. The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report was specific people being killed because of their orientation. America openly discriminates against the LGBT community they don't have equal rights under the law. These are facts. Another fact is the Obama administration is not granting full equal rights to this minority group. His executive order comes up short to full equal protections under the federal law. What part of that don't you understand? Granted I don't live in a country that executes me for being Gay. But my country does business and has treaties with countries that do execute people solely because of their sexual orientation. Plus my country as I already stated does not offer me full equal rights and economically wrongs me by taxing me on benefits because my relationship is not heterosexual.
It disgusts me that there are homophobes posting here on this website.
and regard ErrantElan's comment, redneck is a racist term? EXCUSE ME? Oh I'm so sorry for offending your privileged, white sensibilities-- yeah I'll make sure that "redneck" is just as offensive and hateful as "nigger," "kike," and "spic," even though rednecks have had a long history of lynching, raping and killing Blacks, Jews, Native Americans, and other minority groups through-out the 19th and 20th century in the United States.
No one is trying to mitigate anything here and no one is saying it is ok to kill gays because they are gay. EdHaven was merely correcting your statement that 28% of gays were killed in 2008, because that is frankly ridiculous. People are murdered in this country for being gay and that is reprehensible, but I don't think the Bruno movie is going to increase the frequency of that, anymore than Queer Eye or Will & Grace did. If anything, I expect the movie to show homophobia for what it is and shame the homophobes in the audience. What is the problem with that?
BTW, the Lawrence King story is tragic all the way around. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I had not heard about this story and I feel for Larry and Brandon, to be honest.
Todd, you loose all credibility when playing the victim card; calling yourself apart of a second class citizenship is alittle absurd. If your world view revolves around statistics your likely to find enough reasons never to walk out the door. Lighten up, buddy
Posted by nodirectionhome at June 17, 2009 9:49 AM
Nodirectionhome my world views are based on my realities I have to deal with everyday. I am not afforded the same equal rights in my country that heterosexuals get. Nothing absurd about the facts I stated. They are all true. This does not keep me in my home but I don't keep myself ignorant of the daily prejudices I deal with either. I'm not sure how you feel my credibility is diminished in acknowledging the facts I have mentioned that a group of Americans deal with every day of their lives. I personally don't find the humor in it but hey to each his own.
Ghost072, I actually was not thinking about the consquence of the Bruno movie. But do you really not believe that to some degree that this movie will serve as a trigger for some bigoted punk to do violence on a homosexual? After reading this article. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090616/ap_on_re_us/us_anti_gay_violence
I think there may be some genuine concern for negative backlash.
When you loose your Job because your gay, When your friend is assualted to near death when leaving a gay bar because he is gay, when states can take your child away from you because your gay, when all the other inequalities that I previously mentioned happen to me and others. We should remember to live in that world of denial and not strive for something so frivilous as true equality because Citizencane wants me and others to sit back and laugh about the bigotry gays face on a daily bases. Sure will do, HA HA.
I like the concept of acting responsibly, but I've also always felt it a little condescending when people who are so much smarter and enlightened than you decide what lesser people can and can not see because, unlike them, they can't be trusted to tell the difference between reality and fiction.
Jeez that was a long sentence.
Posted by Travis Crabtree at June 17, 2009 10:46 AM
Using the word Redneck or the term White Trash is not engaging in hate speech and that has to be one of the most ignorant things I have heard in a long time. When rednecks and white trash are oppressed and denied their civil rights for generation after generation then we can begin having that discussion, but until then, shut the fuck up you dumb ass cracker.
I'm waiting for Todd to weigh in on The Deer Hunter, the Dr. Strangelove Blu-ray, Inglorious Basterds, fat people reclining too far back in movie theater seats, hispanic women bringing their babies to Hostel 2, galumph shoes, etc.
Well if Bruno isn't helping, then Todd is definitely not helping at all. All he's doing is shouting and the discussion is decidedly one sided - nobody really seems to be interested in engaging with him since he's not listening to the sympathetic side that some have shown here.
I really don't give two rips as to what anybody's sexuality is - I admit most of my friends are straight, but I have some gay friends (living in metro Vancouver, I'd say it's damn near impossible not to). I don't identify myself as straight first when I meet someone new...so this I am gay first and oppressed second schtick grows old pretty quick. I'm a white male. I've got absolutely no rights - does that fly?
Come to Canada Todd. We give everyone equal rights and better health care.
George Prager, Very Very Funny.LOL. I really liked the first two movies they're in my home library. I occasionally invite the neighborhood crackhead and her baby over to watch Scarface. Of course I make the popcorn.
I can't pretend to know what it's like to be a member of a minority group, and therefore I have no frame of reference or valid opinion about whatever any, some or all of its members find personally offensive. But I also think that an artist is not necessarily responsible for how all of his audience responds to what he creates; while I don't believe that Cohen is promoting gay stereotypes (in the sense that many gays are "effeminate," and what the hell difference does it make), it isn't and shouldn't be his responsibility to make sure that everyone laughs at what his character does in the same way. One of the interviewees said he was concerned that in a room of straight men, they laughed at something differently than in a room of gay men, and that's not Cohen's fault, and he he shouldn't be punished or prevented from creating something potentially transgressive just because some people "won't get it." I suspect that any person who actively laughs at gays because of their gayness will not be paying customers for this movie; the good thing about Bruno's ad campaign thus far is that it's about as "out" as you can be in terms of what it is and what it's about, and I bet that the people who are laughing in the "wrong" way are not going to be going to see the film. The fact remains that however successful he is, Cohen is trying to create a kind of performance art - a Peter Sellers-like commitment to character, albeit in the real world as opposed to a set - in order to mess with folks and expose some unflattering truths about stereotypes, specifically because he confronts people with those stereotypes. Suffice it to say that it's subjective whether that is meaningful, preaching to the choir, or merely offensive, but offering judgment of something because of what it might be (given the fact that few if any of us have actually seen the film) is quite frankly no less short-sighted.
CitizenKane her name is Camilla her son is Jorge he's cute even though he does have a very large cleft palate and lip. From the side you can't even notice. We are going to take him to Mexico so he can get it repaired for free by the medical group Doctors without Borders.
"I can't pretend to know what it's like to be a member of a minority group, and therefore I have no frame of reference or valid opinion about whatever any, some or all of its members find personally offensive. But I also think that an artist is not necessarily responsible for how all of his audience responds to what he creates"
This is pretty much 100% how I feel on this subject. Well-said.
I'll actually go one step further and say that these people into shock humor like Cohen, Stern, Johnny Knoxville, et. al are all fairly progressive in the sense that they end up giving people exposure to the kind of people they would never normally meet in real life. And generally more exposure means more acceptance...usually.
I'm not going to say their intentions are progressive in the slightest per say, but I do think that ends up being the end result, to varying degrees.
CitizenKane I was going to donate my blood for the surgery but since I'm Gay I'm not allowed to donate my blood. So I'm asking members of my prayer group. Of course that will have to be done during the time they are not busy praying for me to be straight.
Actually yeah. Just by the fact of being gay. It does not matter if you're HIV negative. I know this sounds like a joke but it's not easy being green or Jeffrey Wells for that matter.
It's funny that GQ of today (not of the 1980s) will never have a naked man or semi-naked man on its cover but it's ok to have a naked man if it's a comedian being in character of a flaming queen.
Plenty of people can't give blood, for lots of different reasons, including plenty of people who lived in Europe between 1980-96, because of Mad Cow disease.
Todd, you're going to vote Republican next time? Really? I find the Obama administration's recent action/inaction on DOMA and DADT disappointing for sure, but last I checked, the Republicans and their core constituency, the religious right, wanted to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage once and for all. I understand not feeling good right now about a man who's doing his best to look like he's thrown some of biggest supporters under the bus, but Christ, you'd have better luck voting for a third party than the Republicans if that's your beef.
dkaye apparently Cheney supports Gay rights and at the same time will send breeders off to die in senseless wars with people who live in caves. All this to protect my freedoms here in America. BTW Obama continues to fund this wonderful war as well.
On a lighter note I must say Sacha does look fuckable. I bet that ass was airbrushed.
I don't doubt the feelings of the celebrities interviewed in this piece; I'm sure they are 100% sincere. But there's got to be something uncomfortable about being asked by a black guy on a red carpet whether Bruno's outrageous persona is similar to blackface. In these red carpet interviews you are just trying to be as agreeable as possible for fifteen seconds to someone you just met a third of a second before. Can you imagine what would go through your mind in a similar situation? You really don't care if you come across as bland, but you are deathly afraid of saying something that might seem like you are not sensitive to racism. And if you say "no, it's not like racism" you really need a bit of time to go into detail about why you don't feel it's a fair comparison; time you definitely don't have.
For me, it seems that the answer to the question is no, this is not comparable. My thoughts of blackface was that it was done specifically to mock perceived stereotypes of black people, allowing the audience to feel more comfortable in their inherent racism. Bruno's humor seems to have the opposite intent; to expose the homophobia of others and to reinforce in the audience's mind their own disapproval of homophobila...
I guess I see it somewhat different than you lazespud. I think it was Sacha's intent to make millions of dollars while poking fun of Queenie Fags.
Nothing wrong with capitalism in a free speech society.
Ghost, thanks for seeing the point I was trying to make. Todd clearly has an agenda to push, regardless of how little sense he is making as he flies from one topic to the next. I wasn't poking fun at any gay person. Not my lesbian sister-in-law, or my wife's gay boss, or my lesbian cousin, or the gay couples whose marriages I attended this past summer to help raise funds for the No on 8 campaign, or any of the hundreds of LGBT people I have had the pleasure of working with over the past twenty-five years of my adult life.
In fact, and I apologize in advance if anyone else finds what I am about to say offensive, but IMHO it is the Todds of the world to make things harder for the LGBT community. Those arrogant, insolent, inarticulate agenda pushers who cannot keep their discussions on topic, who feel the need to bring in any statistic to push their agenda no matter how off the original topic it may be, who refuse to listen to what anyone else might have to say because it doesn't fit with their worldview.
Being gay doesn't make anyone any more special than being straight. Being straight doesn't make anyone any more special than being gay. Being gay doesn't give you any special insight into the human psyche. It doesn't make you smarter or more informed. It simply means you prefer to spent your private time with someone who shares your body type. That's it. Nothing more.
You want to see equal rights for gays? Start studying how other disenfranchised groups got equal rights. Not by emphasizing how different they are from everyone else but by how much we are all the same. Mixed race marriages were illegal less than three generations ago. Now they're fairly normal. Find out how that change came to be, and you'll have a better understanding of how we can overturn the gay marriage bans.
BTW some of you guys are very funny stereotypical selfapologizing liberals. I personally don't have a problem with Sacha's Movie it is what it is. So what. He's an entertainer trying to make money and doing quite well at it. You BOZOs want to make his effort about it being something other than what it really is. Bruno to me is one big long Gay joke. I could deal with that. Just call a spade a spade ok. My point I'm trying to make is Obama has gone back on his campaign promise in reference to the "Gay issues" to me and many other homosexuals he's a hypocrit and bigot even Bill Maher suggested Obama needs to be firmer in pushing his agenda. It was Obama's Justice Department that equated gay marriage to incest. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/17/white-house-defends-anti_n_217005.html
The facts speak for themselves. He also allowed homosexuals to still be discharged from the military when he had every oppportunity to stop it. http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message811892/pg1
Edhaven you seem to be the type of person that dislikes the facts getting in the way of your reality. So go back to enjoying your make believe world while others have to deal with the facts in their everyday lives. Godspeed to you.
I had enough of the queers for now. There are bigger problems in this world than the ones gay people have. Stick a cock in your mouth for a while and shut the fuck up. Marriage sucks ass. You'll end up getting a divorce anyway. Everyone gets divorced. Why don't you put your activist gene to better use and work towards something a little more important? You act as if you live in Rwanda and your one bad crop away from Night of the Machetes. Relax. Have a drink. Dance. Get fucked. Do something else besides scream into a megaphone.
No offense Todd, but do you KNOW what Sacha's movie "is?" It sounds to me that your observations are based on your interpretations of what you've seen, or maybe more specifically what people are saying in reaction to what they have seen. I'm not disqualifying your point, but you're making a lot of assumptions and pointing fingers at the rest of us for "pretending the movie is something it isn't," when there's no reason to believe that you have any better idea what is intended or what it "is" or what Cohen is trying to do than the rest of us.
Did you see Borat? That character was essentially the same, and he certainly wasn't designed to exploit people from Kazakhstan but to use that persona to reveal prejudices in other people (and wrestle naked). Bruno was originally conceived (at least judging from the bits on his show) to make fun of pretentious a-holes in the fashion industry, reveal prejudices in other people about their homophobia, and wrestle naked. To argue without concrete evidence that he's inherently making fun of gays by playing this character suggests that YOU buy into (or at least acknowledge) the stereotype of gays as much as anyone else in these comments, not to mention that you're unfamiliar with or deliberately ignoring a readily available wealth of his previous work that indicates demonstratively that he's not at all "exploiting gays to make millions of dollars," to paraphrase your earlier post.
DeafBrownTrashPunk, in regards to your post about me above, just wanted to point out that I'm of mixed race - north-African Berber and Polish gypsy. Born into poverty in Poland, came to America (Chicago) as a young, and very poor, child.
I'm a dues-paying member of the International Socialist movement, which understands that underclasses have historically been played against each other by elite upper-classes (99.9% of the time white). Terms like "white trash" refer to the poor whites who came to the U.S. (largely into the South) as more-or-less economically indentured servants themselves. They were historically indifferent to slavery, as this was an institution run by the rich for profit that was never shared. Hate speech is technically and legally (at least internationally) inclusive of not just race, gender, and sexual slurs, but also class ones. Americans, such as yourself, are generally extremely uneducated on class issues, and there's a reason for that. The more that non-economic elite "ethnic people" call poor whites "white trash", and the longer that racism is fomented in poor whites, the easier the play-off is.
Not that any of this will matter to you, but I thought I'd present some facts about me to let you know how grossly and horribly (forget your seemingly abject, kneejerk racism, which is the least-ugly of your sins) you assumed just about everything about a person you knew nothing about.
comment #1
mrNo
says ...
GQ - second only to Details in catering the upscale gay male.
Posted by mrNo
at June 16, 2009 7:16 PM
comment #2
mccool III: 3-D
says ...
that blue steel look is exhausting. Really played to death. And all the hype surrounding this is becoming exhausting in itself. How am I gonna sit through two hours of it?
Posted by mccool III: 3-D
at June 16, 2009 8:39 PM
comment #3
Sabina E
says ...
come on now. If anyone had seen BORAT, they know it was a blatant attack on racist, ignorant, xenophones. There were always uncomfortable silences whenever rednecks would make nasty remarks about Jews, Muslims, gays and blacks.
remember that trailer scene with the frat douche-bags? When they were boasting how they wished slavery was still legal?
This movie will show us homophobia in a new light and force us to re-think homophobes' feelings about the LGBTQ community.
Posted by Sabina E
at June 16, 2009 8:56 PM
comment #4
MathewM
says ...
Borat worked because as a character he was amusing. Bruno on the other hand looks like shit. This movie along with Inglorious Basterds can't bomb soon enough.
Posted by MathewM
at June 16, 2009 9:03 PM
comment #5
Ulysses
says ...
I used to fast forward through the "Bruno" bits on SBC's HBO show. I thought that the character was stupid, really, and actually found both "Borat" and "Ali G" more amusing.
That said, I will probably be seeing this. And I am also a fan of Al Jolson.
Posted by Ulysses
at June 16, 2009 9:10 PM
comment #6
bill weber
says ...
Comedians aren't supposed to HELP CAUSES.
Posted by bill weber
at June 16, 2009 10:49 PM
comment #7
scooterzz
says ...
nice clip...
Posted by scooterzz
at June 16, 2009 10:49 PM
comment #8
EdHavens
says ...
Wait... Jack Plotnick is gay?!?!?
Posted by EdHavens
at June 16, 2009 11:02 PM
comment #9
ErrantElan
says ...
"There were always uncomfortable silences whenever rednecks would make nasty remarks about Jews, Muslims, gays and blacks."
"Redneck" is technically hate speech, as is "white trash", but since you're a brown-skinned Muslim woman, I suppose that's ok.
"This movie will show us homophobia in a new light and force us to re-think homophobes' feelings about the LGBTQ community."
Drop the naive, my-first-politics hogwash. Would that this statement were actually true, but does anyone really believe Borat, or now Bruno, does anything but preach to the choir? Or, further, that it actually shows anything in a "new light"? You have to live under a pretty big rock to not have heard or experienced or seen (even in pop culture!) how homophobia sounds and feels.
Posted by ErrantElan
at June 17, 2009 12:58 AM
comment #10
Todd
says ...
This Movie will apeal to homophobes who like to laugh at stereotypical fags. I'm still more offended by President Obam a and his administration with the exception of Hillary Clinton. The reason being his adminstratuion still supports discrimination of Homosexuals in the military also he's going to issue an executive order to allow for more benefits among domestic partners but not full benefits. My partner still can't get medical benfits if I worked for the federal government. My partner can not share in my Social Security benefits like a heterosexual couple. Plus because I get medical coverage for my partner in California the federal government taxes me as if that is an income but yet my heterosexual counterparts do not have to pay taxes on their spouses medical coverage. Obama is doing nothing to undue this injustice and his justice department is blocking homosexuals from sueing to get this Equal right. So next time and for the first time I'll be voting Republican at least I know my taxes won't go up to support breeders.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 2:42 AM
comment #11
Todd
says ...
This Movie will apeal to homophobes who like to laugh at stereotypical fags. I'm still more offended by President Obama and his administration with the exception of Hillary Clinton. The reason being his adminstration still supports discrimination of Homosexuals in the military also he's going to issue an executive order to allow for more benefits among domestic partners but not full benefits. My partner still can't get medical benefits if I worked for the federal government. My partner can not share in my Social Security benefits like a heterosexual couple. Plus because I get medical coverage for my partner in California the federal government taxes me as if that is an income but yet my heterosexual counterparts do not have to pay taxes on their spouses medical coverage. Obama is doing nothing to undue this injustice and his justice department is blocking homosexuals from sueing to get this Equal right. So next time and for the first time I'll be voting Republican at least I know my taxes won't go up to support breeders.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 3:07 AM
comment #12
Chicago48
says ...
I don't like him or his act.
Posted by Chicago48
at June 17, 2009 4:44 AM
comment #13
fredderf
says ...
Todd - hear, hear
Posted by fredderf
at June 17, 2009 4:56 AM
comment #14
Michael
says ...
Is it just homophobes that like to laugh at stereotypical fags? Because I think they're goddamn hilarious. I had always assumed the more flambouyant ones were TRYING to be funny.
Posted by Michael
at June 17, 2009 5:27 AM
comment #15
nodirectionhome
says ...
Its not meant to further a cause though it does shed light on the underlying homophobia in America. To call it "minstrel' is extreme, he's not exploiting, but rather exagerating typical behavior of a select few that have become for better or worse the poster boys for the gay community. I find it odd that people can laugh at said jokes in private in regards to their race or sexual preference but if such material is made public by an outsider than somehow it's inappropriate or their intent is questioned. Look BORAT exposed the "ugly American", the comedy came either from ignorance of others or awkwardness of socializing with the poor. I know people of ill will towards the LGBT community who wouldnt dare see this film because of the content , so yes the cause is missed, but its onlyt by those who fear facing themselves and laughing.
Posted by nodirectionhome
at June 17, 2009 5:28 AM
comment #16
Michael
says ...
So of course I go to CNN.com right after leaving here, and the lead story is Obama signing a memo granting bennies to same-sex partners of federal employees.
Posted by Michael
at June 17, 2009 5:30 AM
comment #17
Todd
says ...
Michael don't be fooled the memo does not grant full benfits. In fact the benefits offered are minimal. Why not grant full equality? I guess it's ok to be partially bigoted? That's like the fifties in the south when blacks were allowed to ride on the same bus but still had to ride in the back. Thanks but no thanks. I want full and equal benefits.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 5:37 AM
comment #18
Todd
says ...
nodirectionhome said
"To call it "minstrel' is extreme, he's not exploiting, but rather exagerating typical behavior of a select few that have become for better or worse the poster boys for the gay community. "
Why is it extreme? It is minstrel. Not only is he expoiting the homophobic images but Sacha is profiteering from it. Why not do a "Satire" of a stereotypical black family in the whitehouse. Let's see how well that goes over with the same crowd that think this movie is OK? I "betcha" the reaction would be different to say the least. Also enjoy this statistic while you watch Bruno LGBT murder rate increased to 28% this past year. HA HA. Nothings says funny than poking fun at minority group and then lynching them after. We live in a society that still says it's ok to treat a group of citizen as a second class. Obama is only holding out a carrot and not really doing anything to change this. Either he agrees with the bigotry or is too cowardly to defend a minority group.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 6:01 AM
comment #19
corey3rd
says ...
I don't think his haircut is memorable. and his ass is regrettable.
Posted by corey3rd
at June 17, 2009 6:09 AM
comment #20
MDOC
says ...
Isn't the whole idea of Bruno is to create a character that embodies the stereotype?
The reason stereotypes are identifiable and funny is because there are truths to them.
If Bruno goes too far than what is "just right"? The queer eye guys? Richard Simmons? Tom Cruise? Who decides?
There is undeniably some comedy in the above clip. Men are speaking with feminine voices and a non geographic based accent to discuss how Bruno acts too feminine.
The whole scene is ripe for satire, not to be mocked but perhaps they are taking themselves a bit too seriously.
Posted by MDOC
at June 17, 2009 6:26 AM
comment #21
Krazy Eyes
says ...
I don't get the outrage. Actors like Plotnick have made a (limited) career out of pushing these exact same gay stereotypes but now it's "dangerous" when a straight comic does the same thing? Perhaps there's a little professional envy going on here.
Posted by Krazy Eyes
at June 17, 2009 6:29 AM
comment #22
Movie fan09
says ...
Drop the naive, my-first-politics hogwash. Would that this statement were actually true, but does anyone really believe Borat, or now Bruno, does anything but preach to the choir? Or, further, that it actually shows anything in a "new light"? You have to live under a pretty big rock to not have heard or experienced or seen (even in pop culture!) how homophobia sounds and feels.
and Borat was such a big side punch that after the effect wore off, you were more concerned with the blow then anything else.
Posted by Movie fan09
at June 17, 2009 6:38 AM
comment #23
EdHavens
says ...
Let's get our facts straight here...
"Also enjoy this statistic while you watch Bruno LGBT murder rate increased to 28% this past year."
Not to be flippant, but don't you mean the LGBT murder rate rose 28% last year? Because a murder rate increasing to 28% would mean more than 1 in 4 gays were killed last year.
And even then, an anti-LGBT murder rate increase of 28% stlll means gays are being killed at a lower pace than general murder per capita statistics. There were 29 anti-LGBT murders according to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report that was put out yesterday. Out of a population of four million people, that would be a murder rate of 0.00725 murders per 1000 LGBTs. Compare that to a 0.042802 per 1,000 people for the general populace, and since I took the lower number of the estimated LGBT population of the US, the LGBT murder rate per capita number would be even lower if we took the high end of the estimate (six million). So even though the anti-LGBT murder rate did rise at an alarming rate last year, LGBTs are still being murdered at a lesser rate than non-LGBTs.
Posted by EdHavens
at June 17, 2009 7:22 AM
comment #24
Todd
says ...
EdHaven
The past year is last year. The murder rate was specific to what they were which is being a member of the LGBT community. But I Ilike how you want to mitigate this fact that sure it's OK to kill a few people because they are part of this community. After all it's only a few of them. But you forget they only make up less than 10% of the population and it should never be OK to kill someone because of their sexual orientation. Again thats the problem people like you can excuse this type of discrimination even when murder is involved.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 7:40 AM
comment #25
Ghost072
says ...
Todd, I think you missed every point EdHaven tried to make. Seriously. Read his post again. If you choose not to, I think you should at least know that his post didn't excuse any discrimination, it just pointed out that, statistically speaking, LGBTs are actually safer from murder than non-LGBTs. Also, you make the assumption that every LGBT was murdered BECAUSE they were an LGBT, which I don't think we can accurately assert without specific information about each case. After all, I'm sure at least some of those LGBTs were murdered by fellow LGBTs, no?
Posted by Ghost072
at June 17, 2009 8:07 AM
comment #26
Todd
says ...
The LGBT murder static pertains not to all the LGBT mudered last year but the number who were mudered in high profile ways because they were of that sexual orientation. Such as this teenager http://freethinkers.groups.vox.com/library/link/6a00cd9721fedb4cd500e398e2ecd30005.html
But let's poke fun of the second class citizens after all they are less than equal and some of them behave very funny like.Why not kill a few of them for being different.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 8:07 AM
comment #27
Todd
says ...
Ghost072 I did not miss any of his points he is mitigating the issue that people are murdered in this country because they are gay. The statistics that he points to are a mismatched mix. The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report was specific people being killed because of their orientation. America openly discriminates against the LGBT community they don't have equal rights under the law. These are facts. Another fact is the Obama administration is not granting full equal rights to this minority group. His executive order comes up short to full equal protections under the federal law. What part of that don't you understand? Granted I don't live in a country that executes me for being Gay. But my country does business and has treaties with countries that do execute people solely because of their sexual orientation. Plus my country as I already stated does not offer me full equal rights and economically wrongs me by taxing me on benefits because my relationship is not heterosexual.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 8:29 AM
comment #28
Sabina E
says ...
It disgusts me that there are homophobes posting here on this website.
and regard ErrantElan's comment, redneck is a racist term? EXCUSE ME? Oh I'm so sorry for offending your privileged, white sensibilities-- yeah I'll make sure that "redneck" is just as offensive and hateful as "nigger," "kike," and "spic," even though rednecks have had a long history of lynching, raping and killing Blacks, Jews, Native Americans, and other minority groups through-out the 19th and 20th century in the United States.
Gotcha!
Posted by Sabina E
at June 17, 2009 8:46 AM
comment #29
George Prager
says ...
We should all thank DeafPunk for outing herself as a racist.
Posted by George Prager
at June 17, 2009 9:00 AM
comment #30
Ghost072
says ...
No one is trying to mitigate anything here and no one is saying it is ok to kill gays because they are gay. EdHaven was merely correcting your statement that 28% of gays were killed in 2008, because that is frankly ridiculous. People are murdered in this country for being gay and that is reprehensible, but I don't think the Bruno movie is going to increase the frequency of that, anymore than Queer Eye or Will & Grace did. If anything, I expect the movie to show homophobia for what it is and shame the homophobes in the audience. What is the problem with that?
Posted by Ghost072
at June 17, 2009 9:23 AM
comment #31
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
DBTP -- you're doing the right, honest thing here...we can still get you help!
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 9:26 AM
comment #32
RustysaGoodDog
says ...
Thank you DeafPunk.
Posted by RustysaGoodDog
at June 17, 2009 9:35 AM
comment #33
Ghost072
says ...
BTW, the Lawrence King story is tragic all the way around. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I had not heard about this story and I feel for Larry and Brandon, to be honest.
Posted by Ghost072
at June 17, 2009 9:43 AM
comment #34
nodirectionhome
says ...
Todd, you loose all credibility when playing the victim card; calling yourself apart of a second class citizenship is alittle absurd. If your world view revolves around statistics your likely to find enough reasons never to walk out the door. Lighten up, buddy
Posted by nodirectionhome
at June 17, 2009 9:49 AM
comment #35
Todd
says ...
Nodirectionhome my world views are based on my realities I have to deal with everyday. I am not afforded the same equal rights in my country that heterosexuals get. Nothing absurd about the facts I stated. They are all true. This does not keep me in my home but I don't keep myself ignorant of the daily prejudices I deal with either. I'm not sure how you feel my credibility is diminished in acknowledging the facts I have mentioned that a group of Americans deal with every day of their lives. I personally don't find the humor in it but hey to each his own.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 10:13 AM
comment #36
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
Don't take this the wrong way, Todd, but I think it's kind of a miracle you are still alive.
I think everyone needs some sense of humor to survive -- probably you moreso than a lot of other people...
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 10:23 AM
comment #37
Todd
says ...
Ghost072, I actually was not thinking about the consquence of the Bruno movie. But do you really not believe that to some degree that this movie will serve as a trigger for some bigoted punk to do violence on a homosexual? After reading this article. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090616/ap_on_re_us/us_anti_gay_violence
I think there may be some genuine concern for negative backlash.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 10:28 AM
comment #38
televisiontears
says ...
"Don't take this the wrong way, Todd, but I think it's kind of a miracle you are still alive."
Not to butt in here, but what?
Posted by televisiontears
at June 17, 2009 10:40 AM
comment #39
Todd
says ...
When you loose your Job because your gay, When your friend is assualted to near death when leaving a gay bar because he is gay, when states can take your child away from you because your gay, when all the other inequalities that I previously mentioned happen to me and others. We should remember to live in that world of denial and not strive for something so frivilous as true equality because Citizencane wants me and others to sit back and laugh about the bigotry gays face on a daily bases. Sure will do, HA HA.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 10:43 AM
comment #40
Travis Crabtree
says ...
I like the concept of acting responsibly, but I've also always felt it a little condescending when people who are so much smarter and enlightened than you decide what lesser people can and can not see because, unlike them, they can't be trusted to tell the difference between reality and fiction.
Jeez that was a long sentence.
Posted by Travis Crabtree
at June 17, 2009 10:46 AM
comment #41
MilkMan
says ...
Using the word Redneck or the term White Trash is not engaging in hate speech and that has to be one of the most ignorant things I have heard in a long time. When rednecks and white trash are oppressed and denied their civil rights for generation after generation then we can begin having that discussion, but until then, shut the fuck up you dumb ass cracker.
Posted by MilkMan
at June 17, 2009 10:49 AM
comment #42
George Prager
says ...
I'm waiting for Todd to weigh in on The Deer Hunter, the Dr. Strangelove Blu-ray, Inglorious Basterds, fat people reclining too far back in movie theater seats, hispanic women bringing their babies to Hostel 2, galumph shoes, etc.
Posted by George Prager
at June 17, 2009 10:49 AM
comment #43
Aladdin Sane
says ...
Well if Bruno isn't helping, then Todd is definitely not helping at all. All he's doing is shouting and the discussion is decidedly one sided - nobody really seems to be interested in engaging with him since he's not listening to the sympathetic side that some have shown here.
I really don't give two rips as to what anybody's sexuality is - I admit most of my friends are straight, but I have some gay friends (living in metro Vancouver, I'd say it's damn near impossible not to). I don't identify myself as straight first when I meet someone new...so this I am gay first and oppressed second schtick grows old pretty quick. I'm a white male. I've got absolutely no rights - does that fly?
Come to Canada Todd. We give everyone equal rights and better health care.
Posted by Aladdin Sane
at June 17, 2009 10:59 AM
comment #44
BurmaShave
says ...
Last night I saw Lester Maddox on a TV show...
Posted by BurmaShave
at June 17, 2009 11:01 AM
comment #45
Todd
says ...
George Prager, Very Very Funny.LOL. I really liked the first two movies they're in my home library. I occasionally invite the neighborhood crackhead and her baby over to watch Scarface. Of course I make the popcorn.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 11:04 AM
comment #46
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
There ya go, Todd. Unless you're actually being serious, in which case you truly do live a more surreal life than I ever thought possible...
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 11:06 AM
comment #47
mtgilchrist
says ...
I can't pretend to know what it's like to be a member of a minority group, and therefore I have no frame of reference or valid opinion about whatever any, some or all of its members find personally offensive. But I also think that an artist is not necessarily responsible for how all of his audience responds to what he creates; while I don't believe that Cohen is promoting gay stereotypes (in the sense that many gays are "effeminate," and what the hell difference does it make), it isn't and shouldn't be his responsibility to make sure that everyone laughs at what his character does in the same way. One of the interviewees said he was concerned that in a room of straight men, they laughed at something differently than in a room of gay men, and that's not Cohen's fault, and he he shouldn't be punished or prevented from creating something potentially transgressive just because some people "won't get it." I suspect that any person who actively laughs at gays because of their gayness will not be paying customers for this movie; the good thing about Bruno's ad campaign thus far is that it's about as "out" as you can be in terms of what it is and what it's about, and I bet that the people who are laughing in the "wrong" way are not going to be going to see the film. The fact remains that however successful he is, Cohen is trying to create a kind of performance art - a Peter Sellers-like commitment to character, albeit in the real world as opposed to a set - in order to mess with folks and expose some unflattering truths about stereotypes, specifically because he confronts people with those stereotypes. Suffice it to say that it's subjective whether that is meaningful, preaching to the choir, or merely offensive, but offering judgment of something because of what it might be (given the fact that few if any of us have actually seen the film) is quite frankly no less short-sighted.
Posted by mtgilchrist
at June 17, 2009 11:14 AM
comment #48
Todd
says ...
CitizenKane her name is Camilla her son is Jorge he's cute even though he does have a very large cleft palate and lip. From the side you can't even notice. We are going to take him to Mexico so he can get it repaired for free by the medical group Doctors without Borders.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 11:18 AM
comment #49
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
You are my hero, Todd.
Seriously.
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 11:30 AM
comment #50
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
"I can't pretend to know what it's like to be a member of a minority group, and therefore I have no frame of reference or valid opinion about whatever any, some or all of its members find personally offensive. But I also think that an artist is not necessarily responsible for how all of his audience responds to what he creates"
This is pretty much 100% how I feel on this subject. Well-said.
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 11:32 AM
comment #51
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
I'll actually go one step further and say that these people into shock humor like Cohen, Stern, Johnny Knoxville, et. al are all fairly progressive in the sense that they end up giving people exposure to the kind of people they would never normally meet in real life. And generally more exposure means more acceptance...usually.
I'm not going to say their intentions are progressive in the slightest per say, but I do think that ends up being the end result, to varying degrees.
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 11:47 AM
comment #52
Todd
says ...
CitizenKane I was going to donate my blood for the surgery but since I'm Gay I'm not allowed to donate my blood. So I'm asking members of my prayer group. Of course that will have to be done during the time they are not busy praying for me to be straight.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 11:59 AM
comment #53
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
Wait...wha? Not allowed to donate your blood, 4 realz?
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 12:07 PM
comment #54
Todd
says ...
Actually yeah. Just by the fact of being gay. It does not matter if you're HIV negative. I know this sounds like a joke but it's not easy being green or Jeffrey Wells for that matter.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 12:29 PM
comment #55
bryce_david
says ...
It's funny that GQ of today (not of the 1980s) will never have a naked man or semi-naked man on its cover but it's ok to have a naked man if it's a comedian being in character of a flaming queen.
Posted by bryce_david
at June 17, 2009 12:49 PM
comment #56
George Prager
says ...
Plenty of people can't give blood, for lots of different reasons, including plenty of people who lived in Europe between 1980-96, because of Mad Cow disease.
Posted by George Prager
at June 17, 2009 12:59 PM
comment #57
Luke Y. Thompson
says ...
I think in his next movie, Sacha Baron Cohen should play a pro-abstinence teenage girl who gets knocked up.
Posted by Luke Y. Thompson
at June 17, 2009 2:22 PM
comment #58
nodirectionhome
says ...
LYT --
LOL. Can Letterman play her mom. That would be sweet !
Posted by nodirectionhome
at June 17, 2009 2:36 PM
comment #59
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
Letterman's performances in Cabin Boy is one of the best film cameos of the '90s:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMuScu9OpfA
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at June 17, 2009 2:47 PM
comment #60
dkaye
says ...
Todd, you're going to vote Republican next time? Really? I find the Obama administration's recent action/inaction on DOMA and DADT disappointing for sure, but last I checked, the Republicans and their core constituency, the religious right, wanted to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage once and for all. I understand not feeling good right now about a man who's doing his best to look like he's thrown some of biggest supporters under the bus, but Christ, you'd have better luck voting for a third party than the Republicans if that's your beef.
Posted by dkaye
at June 17, 2009 4:39 PM
comment #61
Todd
says ...
dkaye apparently Cheney supports Gay rights and at the same time will send breeders off to die in senseless wars with people who live in caves. All this to protect my freedoms here in America. BTW Obama continues to fund this wonderful war as well.
On a lighter note I must say Sacha does look fuckable. I bet that ass was airbrushed.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 6:06 PM
comment #62
lazespud
says ...
I don't doubt the feelings of the celebrities interviewed in this piece; I'm sure they are 100% sincere. But there's got to be something uncomfortable about being asked by a black guy on a red carpet whether Bruno's outrageous persona is similar to blackface. In these red carpet interviews you are just trying to be as agreeable as possible for fifteen seconds to someone you just met a third of a second before. Can you imagine what would go through your mind in a similar situation? You really don't care if you come across as bland, but you are deathly afraid of saying something that might seem like you are not sensitive to racism. And if you say "no, it's not like racism" you really need a bit of time to go into detail about why you don't feel it's a fair comparison; time you definitely don't have.
For me, it seems that the answer to the question is no, this is not comparable. My thoughts of blackface was that it was done specifically to mock perceived stereotypes of black people, allowing the audience to feel more comfortable in their inherent racism. Bruno's humor seems to have the opposite intent; to expose the homophobia of others and to reinforce in the audience's mind their own disapproval of homophobila...
Posted by lazespud
at June 17, 2009 9:15 PM
comment #63
Todd
says ...
I guess I see it somewhat different than you lazespud. I think it was Sacha's intent to make millions of dollars while poking fun of Queenie Fags.
Nothing wrong with capitalism in a free speech society.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 11:05 PM
comment #64
EdHavens
says ...
Ghost, thanks for seeing the point I was trying to make. Todd clearly has an agenda to push, regardless of how little sense he is making as he flies from one topic to the next. I wasn't poking fun at any gay person. Not my lesbian sister-in-law, or my wife's gay boss, or my lesbian cousin, or the gay couples whose marriages I attended this past summer to help raise funds for the No on 8 campaign, or any of the hundreds of LGBT people I have had the pleasure of working with over the past twenty-five years of my adult life.
In fact, and I apologize in advance if anyone else finds what I am about to say offensive, but IMHO it is the Todds of the world to make things harder for the LGBT community. Those arrogant, insolent, inarticulate agenda pushers who cannot keep their discussions on topic, who feel the need to bring in any statistic to push their agenda no matter how off the original topic it may be, who refuse to listen to what anyone else might have to say because it doesn't fit with their worldview.
Being gay doesn't make anyone any more special than being straight. Being straight doesn't make anyone any more special than being gay. Being gay doesn't give you any special insight into the human psyche. It doesn't make you smarter or more informed. It simply means you prefer to spent your private time with someone who shares your body type. That's it. Nothing more.
You want to see equal rights for gays? Start studying how other disenfranchised groups got equal rights. Not by emphasizing how different they are from everyone else but by how much we are all the same. Mixed race marriages were illegal less than three generations ago. Now they're fairly normal. Find out how that change came to be, and you'll have a better understanding of how we can overturn the gay marriage bans.
Posted by EdHavens
at June 17, 2009 11:12 PM
comment #65
Todd
says ...
Edhaven what Agenda am I pushing?
Oh yeah that silly little thing about Equality for all US citizens. Silly me.
Posted by Todd
at June 17, 2009 11:55 PM
comment #66
Todd
says ...
BTW some of you guys are very funny stereotypical selfapologizing liberals. I personally don't have a problem with Sacha's Movie it is what it is. So what. He's an entertainer trying to make money and doing quite well at it. You BOZOs want to make his effort about it being something other than what it really is. Bruno to me is one big long Gay joke. I could deal with that. Just call a spade a spade ok. My point I'm trying to make is Obama has gone back on his campaign promise in reference to the "Gay issues" to me and many other homosexuals he's a hypocrit and bigot even Bill Maher suggested Obama needs to be firmer in pushing his agenda. It was Obama's Justice Department that equated gay marriage to incest. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/17/white-house-defends-anti_n_217005.html
The facts speak for themselves. He also allowed homosexuals to still be discharged from the military when he had every oppportunity to stop it.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message811892/pg1
Edhaven you seem to be the type of person that dislikes the facts getting in the way of your reality. So go back to enjoying your make believe world while others have to deal with the facts in their everyday lives. Godspeed to you.
Posted by Todd
at June 18, 2009 12:36 AM
comment #67
MilkMan
says ...
I had enough of the queers for now. There are bigger problems in this world than the ones gay people have. Stick a cock in your mouth for a while and shut the fuck up. Marriage sucks ass. You'll end up getting a divorce anyway. Everyone gets divorced. Why don't you put your activist gene to better use and work towards something a little more important? You act as if you live in Rwanda and your one bad crop away from Night of the Machetes. Relax. Have a drink. Dance. Get fucked. Do something else besides scream into a megaphone.
Posted by MilkMan
at June 18, 2009 12:45 AM
comment #68
Jonah
says ...
Milkman to save the fucking day.
Posted by Jonah
at June 18, 2009 1:33 AM
comment #69
mtgilchrist
says ...
No offense Todd, but do you KNOW what Sacha's movie "is?" It sounds to me that your observations are based on your interpretations of what you've seen, or maybe more specifically what people are saying in reaction to what they have seen. I'm not disqualifying your point, but you're making a lot of assumptions and pointing fingers at the rest of us for "pretending the movie is something it isn't," when there's no reason to believe that you have any better idea what is intended or what it "is" or what Cohen is trying to do than the rest of us.
Did you see Borat? That character was essentially the same, and he certainly wasn't designed to exploit people from Kazakhstan but to use that persona to reveal prejudices in other people (and wrestle naked). Bruno was originally conceived (at least judging from the bits on his show) to make fun of pretentious a-holes in the fashion industry, reveal prejudices in other people about their homophobia, and wrestle naked. To argue without concrete evidence that he's inherently making fun of gays by playing this character suggests that YOU buy into (or at least acknowledge) the stereotype of gays as much as anyone else in these comments, not to mention that you're unfamiliar with or deliberately ignoring a readily available wealth of his previous work that indicates demonstratively that he's not at all "exploiting gays to make millions of dollars," to paraphrase your earlier post.
Posted by mtgilchrist
at June 18, 2009 2:03 AM
comment #70
ErrantElan
says ...
DeafBrownTrashPunk, in regards to your post about me above, just wanted to point out that I'm of mixed race - north-African Berber and Polish gypsy. Born into poverty in Poland, came to America (Chicago) as a young, and very poor, child.
I'm a dues-paying member of the International Socialist movement, which understands that underclasses have historically been played against each other by elite upper-classes (99.9% of the time white). Terms like "white trash" refer to the poor whites who came to the U.S. (largely into the South) as more-or-less economically indentured servants themselves. They were historically indifferent to slavery, as this was an institution run by the rich for profit that was never shared. Hate speech is technically and legally (at least internationally) inclusive of not just race, gender, and sexual slurs, but also class ones. Americans, such as yourself, are generally extremely uneducated on class issues, and there's a reason for that. The more that non-economic elite "ethnic people" call poor whites "white trash", and the longer that racism is fomented in poor whites, the easier the play-off is.
Not that any of this will matter to you, but I thought I'd present some facts about me to let you know how grossly and horribly (forget your seemingly abject, kneejerk racism, which is the least-ugly of your sins) you assumed just about everything about a person you knew nothing about.
Posted by ErrantElan
at June 18, 2009 3:13 AM
comment #71
George Prager
says ...
This just came to me in a vision: are there any blind gay guys? There are lots of deaf lesbians, but what about blind gay guys? How would that work?
Posted by George Prager
at June 18, 2009 8:19 AM