I was just reading a Brokeback Mountain thread, but I'm afraid to post in it. So I'll put this here, because I think you guys share my view on such issues, and I don't have worry about being clobbered by the "EVERYONE BE OUT NOW AND WE HATE STRAIGHT FEMALES BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING SO SHUT UP!" camp. I'm rarely afraid to post, but I'm not in the mood to be yelled at and told that my opinion is not welcome because I am not a gay man and I therefore don't get it.
Anyway, somebody posted this article about a gay talk show host slamming the notion and the actors, and two of the points where:
(a) If it were really as acceptable as we're saying it is now that a mainstream movie is a gay love story, then we wouldn't *have* to make such a big deal of its existence. So, if being gay were really so acceptable, nobody would make a big deal over Brokeback.
Then, later on, he says:
(b) If the actors were *truly* courageous (he says they're not brave for doing the love scene because they got paid -- and who wouldn't have fake gay sex for a big paycheck?) then they wouldn't go on the record in the press diminishing the fact that the cowboys are gay.
And I just... don't get that. It's like that quote I posted from The Normal Heart a while ago, where Ned yells at Mickey, because he thinks sex is the only thing that should define gay men -- the whole bit about the political agenda being promiscuity. It seems contradictory to me to say that in a perfect, accepting world, Brokeback wouldn't need to be a big deal -- doesn't that mean that if the world were more accepting, we should *want* the sexuality of these characters to be downplayed? If it weren't such an issue, you wouldn't have to go around being like "they're gay, they're gay, they're gay!!" In a lot of the interviews, Heath and Jake talk about how they're just in love with each other, not in love with each other *because* they're both men, which I think is great -- and on the right path, because they're making sure that the focus is on that they're in love, not on what sex they are. Isn't that -- downplay of their sexuality -- heading on the way to allowing people to accept it? I don't understand. You can't have your cake and eat it too -- it doesn't make sense to make a big to-do about their sexuality and and sure that everyone knows how monumental it is for a mainstream film to be about a gay love story, and also want to diminish it so that it's "normal."
Anyway, I just wanted to hide this here.
A work of art is an invitation to love.
Updated On: 12/16/05 at 09:23 AM