gays of our lives

posts about #gaysofourlives more →
But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

lawyergay
06/02/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
in this time when everything against us hinges on a widespread act of othering and segregating, the best thing anyone can do is openly be themselves and admit who they are (i.e. say it, because saying it does matter) without seeming to indicate for any one second that there's something to be ashamed of or worried about.

Amen, brother.
Reply

lawyergay was starred lawyergay was unstarred

gladys_kravitz
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
I'm not gay so I don't know what it feels like to be deprived of rights and subjected to ignorance and hatred. As a woman born in the 60's, I have taken for granted that I had the opportunity to play sports in school (thanks Title IV), that I had access to birth control and safe and legal abortion, and all the other things the women's rights movement afforded me. I can't imagine how different my life would have been had I been told I couldn't do certain things because I'm a girl. I can't imagine being persecuted for something I have no control over - the person I was when I was born - it must be exhausting.

I don't blame a young gay person for being angry that in 2009 they still have fight for the basic rights and acceptance so many of us take for granted.
Reply

gladys_kravitz was starred gladys_kravitz was unstarred

Spirit Fingers
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
Well, I agree that it is just a movie, and like most movies, it'll only have more significance to those who have something to gain from it. If you're a gay activist, you'll find things for and against the film. If you oppose gay marriage, you'll find oh, so many reasons why the gays should be....what? Throttled from the earth? Um, yeah, whatever. I'm sure if you're in that group, you won't be seeing this movie, and if you are, please know you may be outnumbered by the gays, making your worst nightmare (fantasy?) a reality. And if you want to laugh at Cohen being a complete and utter fool, you'll find that also. Will it make a lasting impression and change the hearts and minds of those who have already decided which mantle they're holding...probably not. And I don't think it should. Bruno is a ludicrous caricature, not a real person. I think if you really want enlightenment in film-form about issues that affect us as human beings, it's best to start with documentaries of real people living life, and let the movies just be entertainment.

Even though I personally don't find Cohen funny, (He's shocking which doesn't always constitute funny in my book.) at least I understand the one thing he brings to many of us, in this stinking pit of incredulity, barely disguised racism, sexism, and altogether nutjobberieness, we call the 21st century. Humor. And hey, it's hard to beat people with prejudice if you're laughing.
Reply

Spirit Fingers was starred Spirit Fingers was unstarred

lobstr
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
One thing's for sure, it is good for the Kazahks..
Reply

lobstr was starred lobstr was unstarred

skahammer
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
There is a lot of discussion in this thread about the possibility of a movie changing the deeply-held opinions and conditioned behaviors of a large number of people.

A movie.

I'm trying to think of movies that have had the impact that people are hoping/fearing Bruno might have. Did The Battle of Algiers hasten the demise of late-stage colonialism? Did Apocalypse Now halt US military adventurism? Did Blue Velvet cause Americans to abandon small towns and suburbs? Did Forrest Gump bring new attention to the lives of the mentally handicapped?

The Thin Blue Line, maybe. Which affected one prosecution in onestate.

I suggest that most of the time, a movie's most significant effect is to introduce into people's intimate mental lives a new persona (hello, red-haired nebbish named Woody).

Thus the fact that every young woman I know wants to bone Robert Pattinson makes Twilight seem to me like the most influential movie of the 21st century so far. And Bruno's not playing in that league.
Reply

skahammer was starred skahammer was unstarred

BookishLookish
06/01/09

@skahammer: Conditioning behaviors? Well, for me it was How to Marry a Millionaire.
Reply

BookishLookish was starred BookishLookish was unstarred

skahammer
06/02/09

@BookishLookish: Now the suspicion arises that the only thing that drew you to this comment was the mention of Mr. Sparkle-Vampire.
Reply

skahammer was starred skahammer was unstarred

DonaldCallirhoe
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
Richard--I realize how seriously everyone must take the precarious civil rights issues of the moment - -but I have noticed by looking at your commenting (not just posts, but commenting) a high degree of sanctimony and anger--that is , of course, totally appropriate and expected...but isn't this, at least in some small respect, kind of a humor website?the humor part is eeking away
Reply

DonaldCallirhoe was starred DonaldCallirhoe was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@DonaldCallirhoe: You're right that the anger is appropriate, but you're also right that I'm being angry and sanctimonious.

I'm just going to shut up now.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

Baroness
06/01/09

@Richard Lawson: No, you're being thoughtful, you're engaging the commenters with a good question, you're musing aloud. And nothing wrong with that, I appreciate it.

I know you can bring the funny, doll. But you're smart and thoughtful too, and we love that.
Reply

Baroness was starred Baroness was unstarred

gladys_kravitz
06/01/09

@Richard Lawson: Anyone who can bring the funny with the recaps week in and week out as only Richard can is free to be a bit angry from time to time.
Reply

gladys_kravitz was starred gladys_kravitz was unstarred

DaeSu
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
In a speech today the National Press Club, Dick Cheney reiterated his support of gay marriage (and his big gay daughter). Is that good for the gays?
Reply

DaeSu was starred DaeSu was unstarred

MattGaymon
06/01/09

@DaeSu: I know! It's hard to wring my hands about a movie when there is a real person like Mr C coming clean on what you know is his long-time position. The next decade's dominoes for us.
Reply

MattGaymon was starred MattGaymon was unstarred

MattGaymon
06/01/09

@DaeSu: [realizing you were being at least a little ironic, but finding it harder to be lately]
Reply

MattGaymon was starred MattGaymon was unstarred

No Day Like Friday
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
Are you fucking shitting me?

Why do you persist in writing about which actor is having SECRET GAY SEX or which city has the MOST BOTTOMS EVER.

You write:

Today we have an older actress who, in the 80s, loved roaming the LES in her limo and picking up young Latino guys. So, we have something in common

It's one thing to devote a missive-length post to the state of affairs of American tolerance; it's quite another to actively contribute to the certitude of some "non-coastals" that gay people are frivolous, sex-obsessed dandies.

Your argument that "we" "get" "it" does not exempt you, not if you're willing to criticize a movie succeeding Borat.
Reply

No Day Like Friday was starred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@No Day Like Friday: But, wait. Wasn't that the point of the post? That some things that are jokes to some people aren't jokes to others?

What, then, do you propose? Should we just shut up? I mean, I also write about gay people who do things other than fuck, but this being a humor website, yes sometimes there are sex jokes.

So according to your outrage with me, should no jokes (or hell, not even jokes in the context of that bottoms post) be made, lest they "actively contribute" to anti-gay "certitudes"? I actually think we probably agree on the bigger issue at hand, though I don't agree that I'm actively contributing to much of anything, frankly.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

No Day Like Friday
06/01/09

@Richard Lawson:

So according to your outrage with me, should no jokes (or hell, not even jokes in the context of that bottoms post) be made, lest they "actively contribute" to anti-gay "certitudes"?

Perhaps? I mean, there's a certain price you're going to have to pay in order to have the things you want.

I really wouldn't consider the loss of Gawker's sex jokes a great cultural loss. Especially in the service of, just maybe, advancing media representation of gay people.
Reply

No Day Like Friday was starred

MattGaymon
06/01/09

@No Day Like Friday: You can win anyone over if you can make them laugh. You can also be Larry Kramer sometimes, but only sometimes.
Reply

MattGaymon was starred MattGaymon was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@No Day Like Friday: You make a good point, and one that hints at compromises I (and others, sure) haven't really considered making. And maybe I should.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

lalaland13
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
Disclaimer: I don't find SBC's act particularly funny. Having said that, will this movie do a lot of harm? Eh, probably not. There are levels of homophobia, and those who cover their child's ears when a trailer for this movie comes on aren't likely to be buying tickets anyway.

There is a mushier middle ground, though, and who the hell knows there.

What's he going to do for his third movie? After a while, he's going to have to do something new, right?
Reply

lalaland13 was starred lalaland13 was unstarred

MattGaymon
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
I mean, it's also fun when Bruno exposes stupid things gay people do and say, cause there's a lot of that.
Reply

MattGaymon was starred MattGaymon was unstarred

cdmunch
06/01/09

@MattGaymon: I know! I like it better when the gays keep their mouths busy with sumthing other than talking.
Reply

cdmunch was starred cdmunch was unstarred

BookishLookish
06/01/09

@cdmunch: I like when the gays sing too.
Reply

BookishLookish was starred BookishLookish was unstarred

oywhatnext
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
I'm not gay but I'd suck a dick to see Bruno land on Bill O'Reilly the same way he landed on Eminem. That was priceless...even though it was probably staged ala Borat attacking Pam Anderson.

Bwahahahahahaa
Reply

oywhatnext was starred oywhatnext was unstarred

brandonjones01
06/01/09

@oywhatnext: Straight guys always offer to suck a dick for something, but they never do it well.
Reply

brandonjones01 was starred brandonjones01 was unstarred

BookishLookish
06/01/09

@brandonjones01: Or in public.
Reply

BookishLookish was starred BookishLookish was unstarred

HiredGoons
06/01/09

@BookishLookish: or sober.
Reply

HiredGoons was starred HiredGoons was unstarred

El Matardillo
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
This movie will be the Blazing Saddles of the 21st Century. It'll be funny, but ultimately meaningless.
Reply

El Matardillo was starred El Matardillo was unstarred

sample032
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
"How much is too much? Is there any such thing as too much? In the place of American Pie (at its core nothing more than a paean and prayer to hetero sex) should we take Bruno-a movie that, sure, makes fun of the gays but it also celebrates them, doesn't it?"

I suggest you watch "Not Another Gay Movie." That one actually is about some rather fabulous gays trying to get laid.
Reply

sample032 was starred sample032 was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@sample032: I've seen it. But that wasn't quite the mainstream audience-grabber I was trying to evoke.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

MrRewrite
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
Um, if it takes that many words to present the argument, you've lost. So sorry, come again next week.
Reply

MrRewrite was starred MrRewrite was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@MrRewrite: Bye.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

valet_of_the_dolls
06/01/09

@MrRewrite: The brevity of this comment does nothing to convince me you're right.
Not that sorry, ciao.
Reply

valet_of_the_dolls was starred

Slovenly Muse
06/02/09

@MrRewrite: Wrong.

(If my argument is presented in one word, I'm automatically right, right?)
Reply

Slovenly Muse was starred Slovenly Muse was unstarred

JaviDecimal
06/01/09

In reply to But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?
It's just Bruno. I mean "they" of the ignorant camp will never get it. They have always found ways of making jokes of other serious high profile gay movies such as Milk and Brokeback Mountain . So it doesn't matter what "they" think because they will never get it. We have time on our side and the younger generations are getting it and will view this for what it is, a comedy.

Also what is your deal with Adam Lambert, we get it, you don't like the guy. He hasn't denied anything for starters, no one has ever asked him directly if he was gay. And if anything he has never compromised who he was or become "part of the machine". During his performance he always said that it was ok to be different and be the weird kid. So I mean just because he hasn't come out and said it doesn't mean he is ashamed of who he is.
Reply

JaviDecimal was starred JaviDecimal was unstarred

rockandhardPL
06/01/09

@I ♥ Bitchy Trampolines:I remember when Brokeback came out I tried to convince myself that the movie would somehow change everything. Like once that came out "they" would see that it was just love and these two just wanted to be together and happy and life shat on that. And then all of a sudden the country would band together to make sure all those cowboys, and kids, and truckdriver, and lawyers, and doctors, and nurses, could just love each other. And then Prop 8 happened. And then nothing changed.
Reply

rockandhardPL was starred rockandhardPL was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@I ♥ Bitchy Trampolines: You've completely missed my point about Adam Lambert.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

metoometoo
06/01/09

@rockandhardPL: I don't think nothing changed. It just didn't happen instantly. Without Brokeback, would there have been Milk?
Reply

metoometoo was starred metoometoo was unstarred

Colander
06/01/09

@metoometoo: If you think about then and now, A LOT has changed.
Reply

Colander was starred Colander was unstarred

JaviDecimal
06/01/09

@Richard Lawson: There shouldn't be a point about Adam Lambert that you need to make. It's only been 2 weeks since the Idol finale and he will most likely come out soon. He hasn't even been in the spotlight for that long, how long was Ellen famous before she came out? Give the guy a break.
Reply

JaviDecimal was starred JaviDecimal was unstarred

rockandhardPL
06/01/09

@I ♥ Bitchy Trampolines:What would have had more weight, coming out right before the finale or on Rolling Stone (which most of middle America won't read anyway and will be tired of him by then since he is already losing his flavor). I don't want to speak for Richard, but I think that is partially what bothers him. Well that and the fact that he is so playful with something so important.
Reply

rockandhardPL was starred rockandhardPL was unstarred

JaviDecimal
06/01/09

@rockandhardPL: Playful about something so important? What, his personal life. Who are we to place the gay movement on top of his shoulders? He shouldn't need to come out because he already is. You wanna see a pitiful closet queen on Idol, watch season 2. Even if he came out, it wouldn't change America. You give the general public too much credit if you think that him coming out before the finale would have changed things. Also if he comes out in Rolling Stone, they don't have to read the damn magazine (who read magazines?) it will be all over the place.
Reply

JaviDecimal was starred JaviDecimal was unstarred

Richard Lawson
06/01/09

@I ♥ Bitchy Trampolines: I do think there's a difference between placing "the gay movement on top of his shoulders" and wishing that someone in his position of prominence would have the fortitude to do something good and civic-minded and bigger than himself.
Reply

Richard Lawson was starred Richard Lawson was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#gaysofourlives

Gawker

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker

But Is Bruno Good for the Gays?

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment