Homosexual Propaganda Film

From the right-wing "Accuracy in Media" web site:

The media are showing their pro-homosexual bias with their excessive coverage of the "Cowboy Sweethearts" movie, Brokeback Mountain. On the website of the Washington Post, I counted nine stories in 6 days about the film.

<snip>

Can anyone seriously doubt there is a pro-homosexual bias at the Post?

The "Lost in Love's Rocky Terrain" story called the movie "welcome and deeply humanist." New York Times columnist Frank Rich was so enamored of the film that he dropped his Bush-bashing long enough to do a glowing review.

The saturation coverage is designed to get enough people to go see the movie so that it can be called a success and even more explicit pro-homosexual movies can be released to the general public. It will be another breakthrough for the homosexual lobby, which still manages to transform their deadly and dangerous lifestyle into something considered mainstream and even attractive. Whatever damage is done will be rectified by more federal spending on AIDS. But no major media commentator will make the connection between presenting the dangerous lifestyle in a positive manner and the AIDS cases that will inevitably result. That connection is considered politically incorrect.

http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/4257_0_2_0_C/

Oh brother! The right wingnuts are really reaching for this one. :puke:

cowboy image that one hell of a lot of straight (and not so straight but want you to think so) men have based themselves on, the slow talking, taciturn man whose word was his bond and who always got the bad guy punished.

If this film had been about two truck drivers, or two miners, or two construction workers, it would be a minor art film in very limited distribution.

Since it's gone after a cultural icon, expect to see it get a whole lot more free publicity.

I'm looking forward to it. Ang Lee hasn't made a bad flick yet.

that heterosexuals are the largest growing AIDS-infected population.

But why should facts get in the way of a good hate-fest.

which is, by the way,another way of dehumanizing us. If we were accusing every white hetero male of being a rapist, since we all know most rapes are perpetrated by them, they would be throwing tantrums for being lumped in with those criminals.

aids was spreading fastest in hetro relationships and lowest in gay relationships. Darn facts anyhow, well we can just ignore them and blame liberals and canada for aids.

who don't count as human to Freepers. Dangerous lifestyle? Morans!

Rock Hudson, Cary Grant...etc

:)

It earned $13,599 per screen over the Christmas weekend.

The number two movie was King Kong at $9,300 per screen.

Go to eBay and see what movie promo posters and piks are going for. Through the roof! Collectors and fans are snapping up anything connected to it. I predict this flick will be as big and impacting as the Passion of the Christ. Hopefully it will have a long-term positive effect for the gay community. Heath Ledger and Jake Guyenhaal will become major stars. Sorry freepers - I'm sorry* your heads are exploding.

*no I'm not - tee hee.

Mel Gibson's little film last year . . . probably in the thousands . . .

and these people call themselves "Accuracy in Media?" One wonders why they don't claim the Post and the Times has a religious Right bias because they quote well-known hate organizations like Focus on the Family, Concerned Women For America and the American Family Association and cover their antics.

Their basis for analysis is ridiculous. The movie is different, critically acclaimed because of its production, acting and story line - that's news. "Promoting homosexuality" - there isn't more than ONE half-sexual scene, is there? And aren't there heterosexual scenes?

These people are nothing more than an organ of fascism.

I'll give them a goddamn propaganda film. Let me at it. :evilgrin:

I forget who said it, but someone said this (more or less) about Brokeback Mountain, when asked whether it had a 'gay agenda:'

"If their agenda is to make people have better opinions of gay people, then yes, they have an agenda."

So, yes, they have a gay agenda. But not the gay agenda that that phrase brings up (the idiotic and non-existant one that tries to "recruit" straights to become gays).

so, maybe we need more ''gay agenda'' movies?

it's like listening to a nasty tempered fourth grader rant about too many different colors in the crayon box. So what.

They're only preaching to their choir anyway . . . and incidentally helping to market the film.

The more revolting the review, the more likely even a conservative will be to go see it.