Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
 

The Gay Steppin’ Fetchits of He’s Just Not That Into You

picture-21

STEREOTYPES — Because nothing can be a movie now unless it’s already been a theme park ride, comic book or a series of action figures, Warner Brothers is about to unleash He’s Just Not That Into You upon the world. Which, for those keeping track at home, is a movie based on a book based on a line of dialogue from a cable show that aired almost six years ago.

This is a romantic comedy that is neither romantic nor comedic. The women are either flighty airheads or delusional stalkers, and for a movie set in Baltimore, there’s only one black character in the main story that has any lines. And he’s a waiter! Who speaks twice! Presumably all the other black folks were busy selling crack to Bubbles on The Wire.

While Not That Into You may be the only movie in existence that will cause you to think, “Oh, Ben Affleck, you’re better than this,” the film’s real sin is in the portrayal of its gay characters.

In a movie all about love and dating, with a full nine leads trying to navigate the rocky shoals of relationships, there’s not a hint of a gay relationship anywhere on the screen. Though discouraging, that isn’t necessarily a mortal sin. What is a problem, however, is how the few gay characters that are on screen are forced to behave: in the flameyest, lispingest, “fiercest” stereotypes imaginable. If black actors were forced to endure Stepin Fetchit, then this minstrel show of homosexuality can only be construed as Mincin’ Jazz Hands.

drew_barrymore2The main offenders are Drew Barrymore’s trio of co-workers at the Baltimore Blade– a made-up gay newspaper that Barrymore’s character works at for– oh, just go with it. Like any economically-minded movie, these secondary characters double as twofers, with a Latino Gay (Wilson Cruz) , an Asian Gay (Leonardo Nam) and a Pasty White Gay (Rod Keller). Remember, the filmmakers already ticked the black box by casting the waiter.

These sibilant-free sissies all curl around Drew to hear her latest dating woes, greeting each sad revelation with a different gay cliché rejoinder: “Oh, girl!” “Heyyyy!” and “Oooohhhh!”– all while they suck their teeth, too. And that’s it for these three. They don’t even talk about their own relationships, even as they might relate to dear ‘ol Drew. Nope, they just sit shiva around the sad sack, serving as a sassy sounding board.

The only other gay characters are seen briefly at an open house hosted by Kevin Connelly’s real estate broker character. Again, they serve only to advise a lovestruck hetero dope. While they do use their own experiences to counsel Kev-Kev in this scene, it’s only to illustrate that “gay signals” are completely different than “straight signals,” so, really, they can’t be any help at all. Because, you see, in the gay world, according to this film, if you look at someone for less than three seconds, it means you’re not interested. If you look for more than three seconds, then you want to screw. And, in a masterful stroke, the sex-crazed experts pivot seamlessly to neutered eunuchs, offering Kevin a cookie, a grandmotherly hug and warm admonishment of, “Oh, honey, no.”

So while the heterosexuals of He’s Just Not That Into You obsessively seek romantic partners, we have no basis of love, longing, passion or relationships; we’re just relentless fuck machines, hunting ceaselessly for dick-dick-dick-dick-dick-dick-dick! Best not to ask for anything else other than a pithy one-liner and maybe if these shoes go with that belt. We’re just your Mincin’ Jazz Hands, here to delight you with our fey ways and our finger-snapping sass-talk before jauntily sashaying out of the way for the real people to have real relationships.

“Who did you think was willingly going along with the ridiculous charade that Sarah Jessica Parker was both attractive and endlessly fascinating?”

Like I said, it’s bad enough that there’s not a single gay relationship on display, but to have a cavalcade of such clumsy stereotypes is just embarrassing. You wouldn’t have an Italian character slurping down spaghetti while professing love for his mother right before going out on a mob hit. You wouldn’t have a Mexican character sneaking into the country to find work as a gardener in-between frequent naps under his giant sombrero. And you wouldn’t have an Asian character with giant buck teeth figuring out sums on a huge abacus while snacking noisily on puppy stew. So why do gays have to slap on the gayface and do a faggoty song and dance just to get some screen time?

And to add insult to injury, all of this is from a media enterprise born from Sex and the City, a show with a loyal gay following. This is the thanks they get for such fervent devotion over the years? Who do you think bought DVD set after DVD set? Who do you think was lining up on opening night for the movie? Who did you think was willingly going along with the ridiculous charade that Sarah Jessica Parker was both attractive and endlessly fascinating?

paul-lyndeWhile it would have been nice to be tossed a token cog in the giant, steaming machine of relationships, the least the Not That Into You team could have done would have been to not portray us as the same silly faggots playing the same Paul Lynde role as 30 years ago, as if we’re going to burst out of your wife’s closet, wearing her pumps and sundress and screaming “I’m the secret squaaaaaaarrreee!!”

We’re not meeting for clandestine rendezvous on shipping piers and in dimly lit corners of the park, or for a hastily gulped drink in a windowless bar. (Well, not exclusively, at any rate.) We go on dates, good and bad, we have long-term girlfriends and boyfriends, we can get married, we have kids. We belong at the grownupss’ table as the fully functional, fully human adults that we are. Not as some outdated, femme clown who entertains the room before slinking out the back door.

It could be worse, though. We could be the only black guy in Baltimore who’s just a waiter.

Dixon T. Gaines is a writer and editor formerly based in New York and who now finds himself in Los Angeles.


wilsoncruz5

Wilson Cruz, who plays Nathan in the film, sees it another way entirely.

“I didn’t swish, my wrists were intact and I think I spoke without a lisp,” he tells Queerty, adding, “I wasn’t playing a stereotype. I’d love to know what I did that was stereotypical.” Asked if there was pressure to “gay it up” for the camera, Cruz says, “No there wasn’t. The actors came in and did what they wanted.”

Cruz, who’s starred in Rent, Noah’s Arc, and yes, My So-Called Life, doesn’t “think they were all queens in this movie. I certainly didn’t think I was being queenie. I think he [Nathan] was likable and friendly, but queenie, no. Some of the other characters, perhaps.”

And here’s one point you can get on board with: “I don’t think it’s really fair to say that every gay character in every film or movie is supposed to be the defining depiction of who we are as a community. No character can do that. I think that I played him [Nathan] as honestly as I could. I reacted in the film as I would in life, and I don’t think I’m a stereotype. We aren’t all Tom of Finland. And if we are honest with ourselves, none of us are. … Sometimes people look at a character these days and say, ‘Well he was effeminate. And that’s stereotypical.’ Well, guess what, some people in our community are effeminate. And I don’t necessarily think that’s the end of the world. Not all of my characters are effeminate.”

By:           Queerty
On:           Feb 5, 2009
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 50 Comments
    • Alexa
      Alexa

      I have no intention of seeing the movie but I’m curious, are there any lesbians in it? I assume if she’s working at a gay newspaper there must be some. Or do only straight chicks work there?

      Feb 5, 2009 at 9:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • blake
      blake

      I would have to agree with many of Mr. Dixon’s points. The commercials for the film feature the gay Asian character fawning over the straight, white girl and delivering to her “Myspace is the new booty call.” It’s the kind of scene that is normally played by the sassy African-American girlfriend who exists in a movie only to prop up her white friend.

      Wilson Cruz, however, is right in that too often there is harsh reaction by many when an effeminate gay character is presented. This sometimes seems to me like self-hatred and demonization of effeminate gay men.

      And, lest we forget, Wilson Cruz is a mixed-race, black and white, Puerto Rican. If Cruz’s last name were Williams, Johnson, Jones, etc., no one would bat an eye if he self-identified himself as “black.” Wilson Cruz looks just as “black” as Muhammad Ali or Will Smith or Jesse Jackson, three African-Americans of mixed ancestry.

      In Hollywood, there is disconnect between the concept of what it means to be Latino and the reality that the majority of enslaved Africans toiled in Latin America. That is why there are more people of African ancestry in many Latin American countries than there people of indigenous (Native) American ancestry.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 9:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chexy
      Chexy

      Thanks to Dixon Gaines for telling it like it is. About another ten years and Hollywood should come around to letting the gays play some real roles.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 9:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again–Straight audiences only like to see gays in movies when:

      1. We’re played by straight actors
      2. We’re either sad and miserable, or loud and flamboyant
      3. We’re dying, or murdered

      Any character, or plot line that diverges from these three elements are soundly rejected by het audiences. Wondeful movies like, “Leather Jacket Love Story”, or, “The Living End” never made it big outside of gay circles for this reason. Yet they are the most real depictions of gay life I had ever seen and they still hold up today.

      I love femme men. You know where you stand with them; there’s none of this “straight acting” bullshit to cloud the issue and no one is playing mind games. That said, straight actors playing loud, flamboyant nelly queens piss me off and I think, causes straight people and too many gay people to view effeminate men in a bad light

      Feb 5, 2009 at 10:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeremy Feist
      Jeremy Feist

      I’m going to agree with Dixon here. It’s not that I don’t believe that there aren’t fem guys in the gay community, it’s that they seem to be the only kind appearing in movies.

      That being said, I’m really hoping that this movie tanks. Not so much because of the gay minstrels, but mostly because this is going to be a bad movie. For $10, your better off seeing Coraline.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 10:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tyler
      Tyler

      I love Wilson Cruz. He also had a recurring (though mostly silent) role on the West Wing, one of my favorite shows of all time. And he’s partially right; there are plenty of sashay-ers in our community. But when the three gay characters in a movie are asexual, and exist as the sage bitties for Drew Barrymore, it isn’t an accident. It isn’t a fair representation of our community. It’s a calculated script re-write to make the gay’s less offensive.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 10:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      I haven’t seen the flick and after this review I’ll wait to catch in on Netflix, but it seems that the Sex & The City spawned flick isn’t showing a true appreciation for our big ol’ gay dollars.

      Love you, Wilson, and all my embattled OUT performers of color more than I can say. Although its not your fault Boo, I’ll have to catch this one later.

      We have to draw the line somewhere. How long can we be snippy sex-crazed caricatures with one hand, while asking for normalcy and respect with the other? ~~

      Feb 5, 2009 at 11:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Leland Frances
      Leland Frances

      I thought Japhy was having another schizo moment [drag clowns Good/fag hag's fags BAD] until I saw he didn’t write this excellent analysis. Bravo for Mr. Gaines, but did he never watch enough episodes of SITC to have hurled over its identical, albeit older, portrayal of gay men? Once in a great while you’d see for a split second a nonstereotypical gay man but he was always there for a “too bad he’s gay and we can’t have him” moment.

      But there were two recurring gay characters who make those in this film look like straight Marines. “Stanford Blatch,” Carrie’s ssssssssimpering idiot friend, was the pathetic pansy always looking for and losing in love, as he drooled his way through that city. “Anthony Marentino” was the ssssssscreaming bitch stylist to Samantha, and as I recall, Carrie in the movie. He and Stanford were both bugeyed and portrayed as so sexually starved you’d think that they’d literally eat any man who they could hold down. Either one of them could replace the eternal flame on JFK’s grave. If any gay men ever protested their trivialization and emasculation it got lost in the legions of silly gay men who drooled over SITC. I’m only familiar with them because one of my best women friends pressured me into watching a marathon with her.

      Nor has Gaines apparently every seen “Fag Eye for the Straight
      Guy,” which starred the same kind of cypher whose weekly mince meat pies eclipsed the less purposely nelly co “stylists.” But the conceited conceit matched this film’s: gay men are eunuchs put on earth to help straight princesses [and princes]; fairy godmothers to help get Cinderella balled.

      Wilson Cruz willing contributed to this freak show whether or not his wrists were a’spinning less than the others.

      This is NOT to say that nelly gay men don’t exist or aren’t as good as non-nelly gay men or shouldn’t be portrayed at all, but a recurring meal made up of only one stereotype feeds those that AREN’T “neutral”—gays as child molestors, etc.

      And, Paul, honey, the two cinematic masturbatory er masterpieces you mentioned may reflect YOUR life, but the majority of gay men aren’t whiny would-be writers or hustlers nor HIV+ outlaws as the leads in “End” nor live in the “bubbled gay universe [of] gay bars, restaurants, gyms and pool side mansions populated by beautiful twinkies, mustached muscle men, denim daddies and leathered motorcycle queens” of “Jacket.” Time to surrender to the real world, Dorothy!

      Almost as stupid and indefensible is the idea that only gay actors should play gay characters. WHO started this nonsense? It’s ACTING, moron, not director of Lambda Legal! The logical conclusion of your hissy fit is that only straight actors could play straight characters.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 11:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mizarkey
      mizarkey

      well, I know my straight friend was an extra in the gay parade scene. Not sure if he made it into the film – but he was dressed as a hunky shirtless bunny with long rabbit ears and holding an inflatable carrot. Because we see BUNNIES all the time at those wacky Gay pride marches.

      This perturbed writer cringing at the gay minstrel show – well guess what…Sean Hayes made a career and fortune from it on Will & Grace, and before that there was “Donald” the fur coat wearing old-school queen on cable TV’s BROTHERS. Gays come in all shapes and sizes – some screamers and some dull as hetero dishwater.
      The Sarah Silverman Program features 2 unattractive, overweight and very committed gay male characters on her show. Where is your article praising her? Is it an attack on Drew Barrymore? Um, she was one of the few celebs to give a NO on Prop 8 soundbite during the LA protests.

      ps —
      this writer had to throw in the strained line: “we can get married and have kidS.” ANYBODY CAN HAVE KIDS in this test tube era — that freak in CA with 6 kids had 8 more embryos implanted without a mate or a job — and she wants big money to get on TV.
      And our “marriages” ?? Well, they are state marriages in 2 states out of 50. These marriages are in no way recognized on a federal level, so they are inferior. Get over yourself. Instead of wasting ink attacking a crap movie that will be on DVD in 4 months — write a editorial about how we are second class citizens and many of us are sadly complacent and don’t have the self-esteem (from being battered by society and our families) to be angry about it.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      @mizarkey: Uhm, wrote don’t YOU write that article … instead of “wasting ink” attacking a bona fide review of a movie?

      Feb 5, 2009 at 11:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Farrah
      Farrah

      @LeLand Frances

      You are the most negative person I think I’ve ever encountered. Almost every post you write be it on Queerty or on Towleroad is horrifyingly negative. Lighten up.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 12:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mizarkey
      mizarkey

      honey – don’t reflect…
      I protest and write many articles, Girrrrrl — as the gays say in movies and on TV.

      He should try to be as inclusive with the mincing gays about town
      as Obama says his administration will be to ALL. (yah, right)

      Ps — In 1947, the black mammy and stepin’ fetchit roles fizzled in Hollywood because the NAACP and black newspaper editorals put pressure on Hollywood Studio heads to stop insulting their community with stereotypes. It worked. With the changing times,
      busy black actors like Willie Best (once billed as “Sleep ‘N Eat”) couldn’t find any work — and ended his career doing TV.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 12:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nathan
      Nathan

      Um…it’s a movie. Let’s pick our battles shall we? As if we all can’t name 20 of our friends who are just like the queens portrayed in the film.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mizarkey
      mizarkey

      It reminds me of how “The Boys in The Band” film was reviled for decades by some gays — and now it’s 40 years old and still resonates.

      4 decades later and we can still look to our gay peers and find:
      1. financially irresponsible debt-plagued friends
      2. couples struggling with monogamy
      3. self-loathing drug-addled friends
      4. teacher friends who are closeted at their job
      5. friends who are struggling with acceptance from their families
      6. friends who struggle with depression and the idea of growing old

      Feb 5, 2009 at 1:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce
      Landon Bryce

      I was disappointed that Greg Behrendt, who I went to college with and who wrote the book the movie is based on, was not more involved in the production of the film. He has always been a fantastic straight ally, even in the early 1980s when he he was a frat boy and got a lot of shit about it. His HBO special “Mantastic” introduced the concept of metrosexuality years before it got a better name and caught on. Greg’s a great guy, and I’m guessing the tone of the film would be more honest about gays if he had written it. I’m not sure it would be a better movie– Greg’s a brilliant improviser but a spotty writer– but it would be a nicer one.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 1:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kevin
      kevin

      @Paul Raposo:

      You forgot “drag queen lands in intolerant small town and wins everyone’s heart after proving how tough/cool she is…turns town more gay-friendly than the Castro and everyone dances to disco music while engaging in end-of-the-movie love fest.”

      Feb 5, 2009 at 2:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      @mizarkey: Are you arguing FOR stereotypes or against them? It seems your doing a good job at both.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 2:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      I’m definitely siding with Wilson Cruz on this one. Hatred of effiminacy probably stems from self-hatred and sublimated misogyny.

      Seriously, given Mr. Gaines’ article, we should be mad because the gay characters in a blockbuster movie — characters who are FEATURED IN THE TRAILER — are depicted as good friends and givers of advice?! just because they’re effeminate? Mr. Gaines, i realize you are gay, but have you met any of the rest of us? According to this author, half my friends are deplorable stereotypes.

      P.S. i’m going to go see this movie with some of my girlfriends, one of whom i advised on her relationship last night. and no, i’m not a shill for the studio.

      p.p.s. Japhy, i have to say i love how you formatted this post, with two diverging viewpoints and no comment of your own. great dialogue prompt! kudos.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Timmeeeyyy
      Timmeeeyyy

      I don’t think it’s about being effeminate, but about being more than a cartoon character. Harvey Fierstein often plays the sissy, but they are real, developed characters. Penn played Milk as effeminate (which he was), but he was still real and complex. I’m sure most the characters in the film are flimsy and shallow, but there’s nothing wrong with execting sensitivity from writers, especially when misrepresenting (or not representing) populations which are so often misrepresented in popular culture.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      @Timmeeeyyy: Exactly!!

      This isn’t about self-loathing or a hatred of fem men. I love fem guys. Love ‘em!! But why do our lives and loves on screen have to be such narrow caricatures? Why, in a film ABOUT relationships, can’t at least one gay character be in one?

      Oh, thats right, all we do is screw and do hair.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • miley crisis
      miley crisis

      Dixon T. Gaines for president.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mizarkey
      mizarkey

      @Taylor

      in the case of blacks in film, then I am most def *against* the stereotypes of 1930s and 40s…it sucks tho that a talented and well-respected pro like Willie Best had to be reviled by civil rights activists when the times changed. He simply took the parts that were offered as embarrassing and offensive as they were.

      I don’t think it’s fair to compare today’s gay film roles to the
      Step N Fetchit angle.

      I think as far as gay sterotypes go —
      well, we DO have humorless dykes, queeny immature gay men, as well as boring-as-hell committed types…and they are ALL depicted in one mainstream film or another.

      Besides, the well-written real roles for actors (gay or straight) are pretty much only on TV these days anyway.

      I am not sure that this Drew Barrymore produced fluff comedy is really the FILM to push our buttons. I will take Wilson Cruz’s viewpoint over a snippy critic with an aversions to campy queens.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      well, reread the article. it IS about being effeminate.

      but if *your* issue with the film is that the gay characters aren’t complex, i think we need to recognize that these aren’t main, lead characters, so they don’t have the space for complexity. and if you complain that they aren’t main characters, please bear in mind that this is a movie about WOMEN who don’t understand MALE, HETEROSEXUAL signals.

      this is just another instance of a poorly chosen battle, imho, with emphasis on the h.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @mizarkey:

      agreed, well said. the above post was in response to timmeeey and taylor.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      @mizarkey: I think Dixon’s buttons were possibly pushed (LOL), but not mine.

      I just prefer not to patronize films that don’t at least TRY to appeal to me as a well-rounded same gender loving person in the 21st century. It may very well be funny, but it’ll be just as funny on Netflix.

      I understand black actors of the 40 playing the roles they were given, I don’t begrudge Wilson or anyone else who has to flame on for a role. Gone With the Wind’s Hattie McDaniel was hated for playing a maid, but she famously said to her critics, “I’d rather play one than be one.”

      I couldn’t agree more. So, go Wilson Cruz. But my money won’t be part of its opening weekend tally.

      @ DGZ: I don’t think this is a battle, more like a discussion about a review. No one’s loading weapons and heading for Drew’s place. LMAO …..

      Feb 5, 2009 at 3:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mizarkey
      mizarkey

      amen Taylor. I am ALL for protesting whatever bugs us via our gay pocketbooks.

      Let’s talk about IMPORTANT stuff – like can Drew Barrymore really pull off her upcoming role as Edie Beale in HBO’s Grey Gardens? haha

      Feb 5, 2009 at 4:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Vicente Fox
      Vicente Fox

      That queen was on ‘Noah’s Arc” too.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 5:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gkruz
      gkruz

      “You wouldn’t have an Italian character slurping down spaghetti while professing love for his mother right before going out on a mob hit.”
      Well, you would in a Scorsese film.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 10:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gbs
      gbs

      Where all the dykes at??? At least there are gay men in the movie, even if they are stereotypical.

      Feb 5, 2009 at 11:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kerynn
      kerynn

      dykes are mythical creatures like unicorns and dragons. you rarely see them unless they are 2 paid for gays the het boys like to stare at.

      Feb 6, 2009 at 12:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Me
      Me

      I’m a big fan of Drew. That said, I agree with many on here: the problem is not that there exists fem guys or that they are even in this film. The problem is that a) the non-threatening fairy god mother stereotype is needlessly pervasive and b) these characters seem to be written so 2-dimensionally, as if spat out of the Character Writer 5000. There are many who feel that this side of gay culture has been done to death. We now ask that others get to tell their stories. I can tell you that, for my own experience, I have no friends like any of the above mentioned characters. I don’t help girl friends with “boy trouble” and unless it’s on the clearance rack at Target, I’m probably not wearing it (yes, I’m cheap, but that’s the point).These are not people I would be friends with. So, for me, I can’t really muster up the energy to see this film. This doesn’t speak to me – and I daresay it doesn’t for others either. I can’t speak for everyone, but I can use a personal anecdote to explain why such depictions (without alternatives) bother me. I was at a party some years back and I and this other fellow were cornered in the kitchen by a crush of wide-eyed women who insisted we must “do Jack”, referring to the Will and Grace character. They wanted us to “perform” in this stereotyped manner for their entertainment – and saw nothing wrong with that. Would they, I wonder, have asked a Native American to do “Tonto” or an African American to do the oft-mentioned “Steppin’ Fetchit”?

      Feb 6, 2009 at 9:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joey Stern
      Joey Stern

      I think that this article actually does something worse than the film. It puts Dixon T. Gaines’ hatred of the femme gay on full display. I often hear the argument that gay (men) are portrayed as too femme on the screen. This argument always comes down to one thing, hating on women.

      Feb 6, 2009 at 9:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Apostle Shada Mishe
      Apostle Shada Mishe

      THE CURE for HIV/AIDS…….AMBUSH

      THE IDEA that AMBUSH cures AIDS
      is being proven by the more than 400 individuals who have taken a dose of 60 ml three times daily for 21 days. The result is that AMBUSH ‘KILLS’ the virus by causing the protein envelope to rupture and the viral particles are discarded by the white blood cells. AMBUSH is able to ‘KILL’ the virus that are ‘hiding’ in the lymph system by its ‘natural radioactive’ properties. This process allows the body to ‘return to normal health’ with a corresponding immunity to that or those strains of the virus.

      What is AMBUSH ?
      AMBUSH is a radioactive isotope of uranium that is found in the ‘palm’ plant of which there are more than 3000 species. When ingested, AMBUSH causes the body temperature in the trunk area to rise to about 102 degrees when the individual is sleeping. The preparation takes four hours per batch, which is then given to the individuals for consumption 60 ml three times daily for 21 days. AMBUSH is a herbal preparation in this form but it contains an active ingredient which is a ‘NEW’ crystalline substance, a drug from the ‘palm plant’ similarly to ASPIRIN originating from the willow tree bark

      RESULTS:
      After 21 days on AMBUSH, ALL the individuals experienced a decrease in viral load to undetectable, an increase in cd4, increase in RBC, an improvement in general health such as more color to the face, decrease in Buffalo hump, an increase in gluteal muscles, a decrease to having no joint pains whereby individuals can bend to touch their toes, and walk up steps are but a few examples. There is also a dramatic increase in their sexual appetite beginning after the first week of therapy

      DISCUSSION:
      In any plant concoction such as percolated ‘tea’, there are 30-40,000 compounds, whi ch would take the scientific community twenty years to isolate one particular ingredient if they knew what they were looking for. The LORD GOD has given me seven steps to isolate the active ingredient, which is soft and metallic in nature and has a carbon- uranium-sulfur-(classified)-phentolamine configuration or structure. This is similar to Federick Kekule and the discovery of the benzene ring where he dreamt the structure.

      As an antiviral and ‘natural radioactivity’ producing agent, AMBUSH is also effective against leukemia, lupus and HPV. Here I am saying that I have ‘GIVEN’ AMBUSH in the same ‘strength’ and dosage to patients with leukemia, lupus and HPV. A 35 year old male with HIV found it difficult to impossible to urinate was put on ‘green tea’ and water while the doctors contemplated prostrate surgery. One of the doctors gave him my number , I sent him a supply of AMBUSH an d he has not been given any more ARV’s, since taking AMBUSH 18 months ago, is in ‘good’ health and has expressed a willingness to be examined by HIV investigators like many others who have taken AMBUSH.

      I have sent this ‘IDEA’ to most HIV research agencies, scientist of the field, universities, hospitals, clinics, politicians and news agencies to which it is REJECTED because the name of THE LORD GOD is mentioned. He has steered me scientifically through the processes such as which plant and how to produce the active ingredient. What are the odds of a Florida Pharmacist picking a plant would contain the CURE for HIV/AIDS ?
      I have never charged any of the people for their supply of AMBUSH but a life saving has been spent on the project with NO renumeration from any sources because AMBUSH falls outside the walls of modern medicine and research.

      PROPOSAL:

      My proposal is that I PROVE that AMBUSH CURES HIV/AIDS by giving it to a number of END-STAGE or DRUG-RESISTANT people and the scientific community watches their recovery. This proposal addresses the problem in that I have already outlaid the results to be obtained.

      This IDEA is unconventional in that the scientific community has rejected AMBUSH because I say it is GOD given. Secondly if I wrote it according to certain standards, then it might be peer reviewed. However, THE LORD GOD has also shown me that there are five enzyme systems associated with the virus, reverse transcriptase, protease, fusion and two more of which causes the virus to be AIRBOURNE. This means that without DIVINE intervention mankind and ALL warm- blooded mammals will be extinct in a number of years.

      The PROOF of what I am saying is found in scientific papers wherein it is found that when the protease cuts the viral strands, it cuts it at DIFFERENT lengths EVERY time, to which it should always be a valine at the end but is a different amino acid every time. This is why it is IMPOSSIBLE to produce a VACCINE.

      Since this is NOT a hypothesis but there are about 400 individuals who have taken AMBUSH, here lies a vast area in which to check, recheck and confirm that AMBUSH CURES AIDS. Let it be mentioned that during the HIV reproductive cycle, reverse transcriptase converts viral RNA into DNA compatible to human genetic materials. Thus the human DNA has been ‘hijacked’ and since each person has a DIFFERENT DNA, then the new viral copy is unique to that person which shows that each individual has a DIFFERENT STRAIN of the virus. Consider two HIV positive people swapping viral strains and increasing its complexity with multiple partners.
      It can also be proposed that they be revisited as proof that the strain or strains that they had were ‘killed’ at the time of taking AMBUSH considering that a person can catch as many different strains as there are people who are infected by HIV.
      I am also willing to work with the scientific community in identifying those individuals who took AMBUSH and wish to be identified with this process notwithstanding that some are stigmatized while others are jubilant,

      Once AMBUSH is verified as being able to accomplish that which is aforementioned then the next stage might be the natural and artificial synthesis of the substance.

      Finally, if this is accepted or not, believed or not, THE LORD GOD always wins and this is the heavenly truth to which AMBUSH was divinely given to mankind for the CURE of HIV/AIDS and it will be here forever. Apostle Shada Mishe.

      apostleshadamishe@gmail.com

      Here is a video taped presentation that I gave at t he Martin Luther King library in Washington

      Feb 6, 2009 at 11:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • faghag
      faghag

      Japhy, you need to smoke a bowl, you take life far too seriously.
      It’s just a fun movie, not rocket science.
      lighten up.

      Feb 6, 2009 at 12:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Allanah
      Allanah

      Never blame the actors. Please, Hollywood still treats straight white women like crap. There are so few roles for openly gay actors and people of color that it’s ridiculous to judge them for just wanting to work.

      Feb 6, 2009 at 12:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CJ
      CJ

      Not that it matters, but the Hispanic gay and the Asian gay in the movie are gay in real life too…

      Feb 6, 2009 at 10:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jababe
      jababe

      I will damn sure give Drew Barrymore the benefit of the doubt…I HATE being TOLD what I should find offensive.

      Feb 6, 2009 at 10:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jababe
      jababe

      (Or shouldn’t)

      Feb 6, 2009 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Russ
      Russ

      Allanah, yes. I’ve been in love with Wilson Cruz since fifth grade, and it’s a crying shame that so many of his roles are asexual pap. There need to be more strong fem guy roles out there.

      Feb 7, 2009 at 3:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Timothy
      Timothy

      I believe Wilson Cruz when he says he didn’t queen it up. He’s an adorable sweet guy but, well, he’s not exactly the butchest guy in WeHo. If his character is a bit fey, well that may be because the character is realistic and played the way Wilson lives.

      Let’s face it folks, there really are some gay boys who are at bit less masculine and it’s not always homophobic to show them. In fact it may be a wierd sort of homophobia to insist that all portrayals of gay men be indistinguishable from stereotypical hetero men.

      Feb 7, 2009 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gurlene
      Gurlene

      Good lord. This is the third blog with an article about this movie.

      Whatever happened to seeing a movie for the entertainment value it presents? It seems any movie mad nowadays regardless of the race or life style or career of the gay characters in it here comes comment after comment about how the movie either stereotypes or leaves out something from their respected communities.

      I bet the people who scream and critize the most have no idea how difficult it is to find investors, actors, support crew, marketing and everything else it takes to get these projects to the big screen.

      Feb 8, 2009 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • boyssaygo
      boyssaygo

      This is a pointless article. You brought all the gay stereotypes into focus, but what did you expect to see in the first place? You actually expected a Hollywood film to be anything but stereotypical? Also pot calling the kettle black line (oh how apropos!): “The women are either flighty airheads or delusional stalkers…”.

      Feb 8, 2009 at 2:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      Where are the gay men that are masc, fit and financially sound in this movie?? I know who Stepin Fechit is and totally agree..

      Feb 10, 2009 at 10:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alain
      alain

      Why should there be GAY REPRESENTATION for a movie to be good??

      Feb 10, 2009 at 12:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Luis
      Luis

      Wilson Cruz is a triple threat: Latino, Black, and Gay. Also a great actor who should get more substantive roles.

      I think that what gets people heated with movies like this is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. They essentially want to be straight white upper middle class films, but also want the accolades of having a diverse cast, so they add all of these POC and queer characters as window-dressing. It’s a slap in the face. You almost want to say “Don’t bother,” but you also want your favorite POC actors to get work.

      Feb 10, 2009 at 2:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Luis: I agree he is so like likable. Maybe being in such a big movie will open even more doors for him.

      Feb 10, 2009 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kristin
      Kristin

      This reminds me of how much Richard Curtis’ ‘Love Actually’ pissed me off, in the way that absolutely EVERY KIND of inter-personal emotional connectivity was explored, no matter how briefly, except for, wait for it, a homosexual relationship.

      When I discovered on the DVD extras how originally there was a subplot involving two lesbian schoolgirls (omg!hot!girlongirl!HOT!) that got drafted out of existence and then a subplot that actually got filmed and then cut during editing, involving the principal of the school in a lesbian relationship where OF COURSE her partner was dying of a terminal illness… well, I was glad that he didn’t touch on it at all, if that’s how it would have happened.

      Ah, Richard Curtis. The gays only exist in your world if they don’t do anything, you know, overtly gay, or die.

      Feb 10, 2009 at 10:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Josh
      Josh

      I think there is a conversation to be had about anti-femme sentiment in the gay community, but I think to make this conversation all about that shuts down other potentially interesting areas of discussion. Personally, I don’t care about whether a gay character in a movie is masculine or feminine (though diversity is nice), I just tire of seeing gay characters who are one dimensional, asexual, only there to service the straight characters in the story, and meant to amuse the audience with sassy one-liners. If they’re supporting characters, I understand that they wouldn’t be as well developed as the leads, but even supporting characters don’t have to be completely cardboard.

      Feb 11, 2009 at 4:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Anthony in Nashville
      Anthony in Nashville

      Just got back from seeing the film and I don’t see what the big deal is. The gay characters had such minimal roles that the movie could have easily been made without them.

      For what it’s worth, I think the character who acted the most like gay men was Alex.

      Feb 15, 2009 at 3:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marissa
      Marissa

      whos the actor for the hot gay asian guy in the movie?

      May 11, 2010 at 10:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.