Back to the post
Back to the post
Back to the post
All Your Queerty Questions Answered
Back to the post
60 Comments
No. 2 ·
scott ny'er (formely scott)
well that was interesting. Thanks.
now, i just want to know who actually DID create and approved of the redesign. Because it sucks. I almost always go to classic unless by accident. And I never click on morning goods now because it’s all about impressions.
i’m too stubborn. I think others just give in, hence the increased unique visitors.
Apr 10, 2009 at 7:52 am · @Reply
· Flag
· Flag
No. 3 ·
BeautifulMnd · Member · 12 comments
I dont think you are full of yourself Japhy! Think you’re doing a great job!
Apr 10, 2009 at 8:24 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 6 ·
VegasTeaRoom
Queerty now looks like that crazy, and defunct Gawker site, Sploid.
Do you really think everyone has a 36″ screen?
Apr 10, 2009 at 9:49 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 7 ·
Forrest
I will always love Queerty because of the great info which is more important to me than design. The new version is a little too “busy” for me.
And this site to me gives off a friendlier and less bitchy vibe than Towleroad. They do a good job as well but I feel like I need to live in Chelsea and spend all summer on Fire Island when I skim that site. Their “cool kids” or “A Gay” angle gets old. Queerty has a better balance of personality.
Apr 10, 2009 at 10:05 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 11 ·
jr
thanks for that — as a daily QRT browser, i like having a bit of context to put the site in. I also like the fresh ideas and the willingness to branch out and try new things — such as today’s weekend listings. I’d love for this to become a one-stop-shopping news/entertainment/community forum site for politically and socially open-minded gays. that may be a tall order for a one man operation, but still. Maybe i should confess that i found qrt while googling something like “gay news” or conservative gay news — a search that also turned up towelroad. i love the “no agenda…” policy! it’s refreshing since most gay news online presupposes total submission to the democratic party.
anyways, keep up the good work, you’re off to a great start japhy.
Apr 10, 2009 at 10:28 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 12 ·
Michael
Japhy needs to read his own response entitled “Why everyone hates redesigns.” It should provide sufficient explanation and evidence as to why many, including myself, think he is fairly rude and full of himself. I hope he is not actually like the person is his response.
Apr 10, 2009 at 10:32 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 14 ·
Lux8600
I love all the stuff you do Japhy, and you do have to have a thick skin in this bizz, tho the gay negs are minnows compared to some of the bs I see from straights on other venues. I like that actually, that straights are bitchier queens than gays.
You have great taste in MEN with your pix. As far as black or yellow dudes, umm, they would have to be off the chart exceptional to buzz my briefs, specially Asians, yikes, that just won’t happen.
Your writing is awesome, keep it up!!!
Apr 10, 2009 at 11:09 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 17 ·
CONFESSIONS OF A BAD BOY
that is not tom ford. He’s to skinny
Apr 10, 2009 at 12:15 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 18 ·
Kevin@BGFH
@CONFESSIONS OF A BAD BOY: I’m afraid it is Tom Ford. I remember the original photos in Out Magazine. He talks about it here, though I couldn’t find the actual photos:
http://out.com/exclusives.asp?page=1&id=23015
Apr 10, 2009 at 12:39 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 23 ·
ko
re: female Morning Goods
The point is not just to find “hot ladies” on the internet, but hot ladies that cater more towards the lesbian gaze rather than the hetero male gaze. It would be great to see that on Queerty, say, once a month or so.
I remember twice in all the years I’ve been reading this site that women were used for morning goods. It was a nice gesture to your female readers. After all, your logo does seem to be lesbian-inclusive.
Apr 10, 2009 at 1:06 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 28 ·
Michael W.
@Erick: It’s hard to tell who posts what. They removed the bylines for some reason.
Rule of thumb, as far as I know, is that all the long, drawn out posts with big words seems to be Japhy and the gossipy and short posts and half naked men (Morning Goods the exception) is David.
No idea where “Cord Jefferson” fits in.
Apr 10, 2009 at 1:46 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 29 ·
Alexa · Member · 748 comments
I’ve been reading here since the beginning and I don’t think there’s ever been an actual female morning goods, ie. in place of the regular male one, but a couple of years ago there were a few female posts in addition to the daily male one. We were promised more, but they stopped. Considering the pic in this post is a typical straight male fantasy and nothing I find hot at all, that might be a good thing ;-) So while it is definitely easy to find pictures of women online, they’re aimed at straight men and not always what most lesbians (in my experience) find hot. Just like most so called lesbian porn is a huge turn off for actual lesbians.
@scott ny’er (formely scott): I’d take Rosie in a bikini over the cowgirl pic. And I’m not even joking.
Apr 10, 2009 at 1:52 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 30 ·
scott ny'er (formely scott)
@Alexa: That was pretty interesting, at least to me. I always wondered what “type” Lesbian women find attractive. I know not everyone has a type but, I would think that a majority of Lesbians might find a certain type attractive. It’s just not the cowgirl slutty bar type, it seems.
You should mail the Queerty folk some examples. Just a suggestion. Maybe this?
Apr 10, 2009 at 2:08 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 34 ·
Jim Key
Japhy –
For a writing/editing staff of one, you produce an amazing amount of content and when I have a chance to visit your site, I enjoy the mix of content.
Regarding your “beef” with Lorri Jean for supposedly not agreeing to an interview with you. I still have a copy of our last email exchange in which I told you I would consider arranging such an interview. In fact, as you’ll recall, I’m the one who first suggested such an interview. Lorri has done interviews with every journalist who has requested one and has participated in several town hall meetings, at which anyone has been able to ask her a question.
But Japhy, you’ve shown no interest in the Center’s marriage equality work.
We’ve pitched you many times to make your readers aware of the opportunity to join hundreds of other volunteers for our door-to-door canvassing as we change hearts and minds about marriage equality and gather valuable data regarding messages that are effective in persuading people to support our freedom to marry.
The Center has been doing this work for more than 4 years – one day I’d love for you to accept our invitation to join us.
For those reading this, I’ll make a plug now: please join us for tomorrow’s (Saturday’s) canvass – details can be found at: http://www.VoteForEquality.org. We provide training before you start – it’s something anyone can do! In fact, right now you can find a story about our canvassing work at Advocate.com, featuring Kathy Griffin who volunteered with us last month.
I had also hoped you would have shared with your readers information about the Center’s video contest: http://www.lagaycenter.org/ProjectPushback, through which we hope to inspire the development of 60-second videos that have the potential to change hearts and minds in support of marriage equality. A fantastic panel of judges will award $2,500 to the creator of the video they select as the best.
If you now have an interest in not only asking Lorri whatever questions she can answer about the campaign, but sharing with your readers opportunities for them to get more involved in promoting marriage equality, let’s set it up!
And if you have written about the initiatives I’ve mentioned, and I somehow missed it, please accept my apology and let me know where I can find the stories.
Best,
JIM
JIM
Apr 10, 2009 at 4:32 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 35 ·
Shaniqua Ubangi
@hardmannyc: Yeah I don’t get the HX/Regent hate either outside of Andrew and David’s dislike…can’t we find something else to talk about because it makes you look more than a little petty
Apr 10, 2009 at 4:50 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 38 ·
afrolito · Member · 1241 comments
@Lux8600:
“As far as black or yellow dudes, umm, they would have to be off the chart exceptional to buzz my briefs, specially Asians, yikes, that just won’t happen.”
You are an ignorant, racist piece of trash. I hope you choke on your stupidity.
Thanks for answering my questions Japhy, but i’m not buying them.
I don’t for one minute believe it’s that difficult to find hot black, ASIAN, and latino men for the morning goods. You can find plenty at the same places you steal all the other pics from. Yes, there definitely is aryan standard set by gay white photogs, but it doesn’t mean you have to accept it. I’ll send you some links.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt about not purposefully scapegoating black people as the sole arbiters of homo-repression, but the negative stories about black people here, far outweigh the positive imo, and only feed into the already pervasive racism in the gay community.
Apr 10, 2009 at 6:54 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 40 ·
scott ny'er (formely scott)
@afrolito: I’ll agree with you on this. I also inwardly questioned the response about not being able to find hot black, Asian and Latino men. Queerty is just NOT looking hard enough. It’s definitely out there.
I don’t think Lux8600 is racist or ignorant. I think it has different tastes and unfortunately doesn’t know how to communicate effectively and properly without offense. It would have just been easy to say, I dig the morning goods the way it is, the others aren’t my type. But by Lux8600 saying “yikes”, there is a inference of disgust. So racist. Naw. Ignorant. Naw. Offensive and trash. Pretty much and quite possibly.
Just my 2 cents.
Apr 10, 2009 at 7:08 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 41 ·
CONFESSIONS OF A BAD BOY
@Kevin@BGFH: The angle threw me off. I belive you.
Apr 10, 2009 at 8:11 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 48 ·
The Gay Numbers
@Michael W.: It depends on the behavior. I dated a guy who upon having sex said he does not date black guys. He was a racist. I have a friend who dated a guy who woke up from a nightmare saying that he thought my friend (a black man) had robbed him. I know another guy who when I told him I disagreed with his position on healthcare said my views were based on my race. Some are. Others may not be. There is no one rule, and certainly no subject to saying it does not exist in the gay community. I am not supporting Afrolito. Just keeping it real about whats out there.
Apr 11, 2009 at 3:18 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 49 ·
The Gay Numbers
Re Find men of color
Yeah- that’s hard to believe. There are a ton of gay black sites out there if you google them. So the idea that you can’t find any is hard to believe. Same with Asians and Latinos. I am equal opportunity (I fuck any race) – if I am able to find them, then I find it hard to believe you cannot.
Apr 11, 2009 at 3:20 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 53 ·
Michael W. [Different person #1 using similar name]
@The Gay Numbers: You could be a straight guy on the dating scene with similar experiences involving women (including the tales from your straight buddies). So what? Those people were ignorant and insecure. It lends no credibility to the idea that there’s “pervasive racism” in the gay community.
I understand you may not agree with Afrolito, but your argument and attempt to “keep it real” was clearly meant to reinforce what he said. Let’s keep it really real by citing the overwhelming number examples in your lifetime of gays of all races being kind and endearing for the most part. Why can’t we keep it real with positive experiences you and some of your (I’m assuming black) friends have had with white gays which no doubt outnumber the bad by a large margin? Or would that be keeping it fake?
Apr 11, 2009 at 2:42 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 54 ·
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
Oh please, I’ve never had positive experiences AT ALL. And this is from someone who has 80% been with more white then black people due to circumstances beyond his control.
Damn, I have some stories!!
That are exactly with what GN is trying to say….but I’m an equal opp, so I don’t think the sun shines out of black gays and that’s were you see the light.
People are people.
Apr 11, 2009 at 2:56 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 55 ·
Brianna
I was looking for this yesterday and ended up skipping right over this post because of the “ass-shots” as Swellster mentioned. I would appreciate it if these posts would have actual relevant accompanying pictures. Actually, I’d appreciate it if you just didn’t have ass-shots on queerty at all.
@ko:
I agree. Also, “…After all, your logo does seem to be lesbian-inclusive.” THANK YOU. This is a point I made in my post in the questions thread that was screened and deleted by queerty for god knows what reason. Queerty, you going to get back to me on that one? Emailed you last week…
@RainaWeather:
I have to say… Thonged cow girls with ridiculous make-up totally do it for me… Actually, no.
Apr 11, 2009 at 7:29 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 56 ·
Cee
I’m a regular visitor. I’ve been coming to this site for a few months now a few times a week. I don’t like the new design. I always click Classic Queerty. I’m young and it’s not like it’s hard for me to get used to a new design like some older people have hard time with change. I just don’t like it. Don’t like how it’s outlined and don’t like the way the pictures are set up. The fact that you have to click on a page number to see the next picture in a photo gallery vs. thumbnails where you can see all the pics on one page and click which ones you want to see up close. It’s a no brainer. It’s kind of like gay.com. People are still going to the website, but they lost a lot of people with the new design. Mostly non subscribers, but I know they lost a lot of subscribers as well. That’s why it’s so cheap to join now. A lot of chat rooms on gay.com that were once highly populated are now empty. The new design sucks. Enough about gay.com though. Point is if it’s not broke, don’t fix it. I like that Queerty still has classic queerty option though. So I don’t have to deal with the funky new design.
Apr 11, 2009 at 11:20 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 59 ·
ko
how about getting a “lesbian correspondent” on staff, to pick some pictures of hot women to post?
It amuses me how uninformed many gay men can be about lesbian turn-ons. Queer women don’t have the same option, since we are continually bombarded with visuals designed to appeal to men.
Personally, my “type” is found at some point in the vast spectrum between the arched-back cowgirls and Rosie O’Donnell.
Apr 12, 2009 at 2:28 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 60 ·
Mike D
w00t for Sufjen Stevens! His songs make me cry tears of joy as well as sorrow. And he’s very cute – especially when he has those wings on.
As for all the other things – redesign is okay, but I look forward to seeing the next iteration.
Keep up the good work! Queerty is spreading fast among the internet gays, and beyond!
Apr 13, 2009 at 9:19 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
Add your Comment
The Gay Steppin’ Fetchits of He’s Just Not That Into You
Back to the post
50 Comments
No. 62 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 64 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 65 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 66 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 67 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 68 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 69 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 70 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 72 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 74 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 75 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 77 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 78 ·
dgz · Member · 704 comments
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 79 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 80 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 82 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 83 ·
dgz · Member · 704 comments
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 85 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 91 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 92 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 93 ·
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.
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 100 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 101 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 102 ·
boyssaygo · Member · 2 comments
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 103 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 105 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 107 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 108 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 109 ·
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 · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
Add your Comment
Daily Aural: 33Hz
1
Back to the post
1 Comment
Add your Comment
Morning Goods: Julian Gonzalez
Back to the post
29 Comments
No. 114 ·
benwa · Member · 53 comments
Long time viewer and I’m sure my bf will not be at all surprised to see me comment today. Thank you for the brown! this Kid is Hot! Too bad the stupid Photographer put him in the Mesh a_frame. What is he? in a 80′s porn? We really must get away from this photographer. I tire of seeing the signature work with the the stylized green printing and over used poses. But hell he does fine some hotties.
Dec 2, 2008 at 9:37 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 115 ·
dvlaries · Member · 1048 comments
Hmmm … one of these days, how about some handsome, semi-bear, about 35, in front of roaring fireplace, pouring two tulip glasses of champagne, inviting me to the warm cabin he’s in with his eyes…?
This guy isn’t ugly but he’s more suited to the cover of a rap album.
Dec 2, 2008 at 9:57 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 122 ·
Michael W.
Yes indeed, dvalries. The only semi-inviting pics in the bunch are the first two thumbnails. Other than that, he looks like he either wants to beat me up or take a shit.
I attribute it to (what I’m assuming is) a fresh start in modeling.
Of course if his name was Julian McDonough, I wouldn’t get accused of racism for calling out his angry caveman look in the first place.
Dec 2, 2008 at 11:38 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 123 ·
David Dust
He is absolutely gorgeous! RED Models is known for their hot models.
Dec 2, 2008 at 11:59 am · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 126 ·
blake
No, Michael, I called you a racist based on your comments posted today and previously (like this racist comment: @Michael W.: ). You’re the one who talked about “good, wholesome, muscular whiteness.” Why should I label you as a racist, white supremacist? You happily bragged about your feelings. Right?
Dec 2, 2008 at 1:06 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 127 ·
Michael W.
So what if I prefer white men? The same can be said for the majority of gay white males. I’m just one of the few who’s up front about it because I don’t have any feelings of liberal guilt.
I haven’t said anything racist. I haven’t used any racial epithets. I am personally attracted to white men. That doesn’t make me racist, it makes me honest about my preferences.
Dec 2, 2008 at 1:44 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 128 ·
ninebone · Member · 27 comments
:applause you found a man of color
:cry you are back to the 18-24 yo twinks
As far as the “ruler of the universe” modeling agency tag goes – I would vote for Antonio Banderas.
Didn’t the model Twiggy make that ‘skinny’ model look popular back in the mid-1960′s?
Throw this minnow back into the pond and let him grow up for about 10+ years then we will see. :sigh
Dec 2, 2008 at 1:47 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 130 ·
blake [Different person #1 using similar name]
Dude,
Give it a rest. Your comments on the previous thread (http://www.queerty.com/morning.....-20081125/) weren’t about a preference for white men. They were blatantly anti-people of color. Your use of “Affirmative Action” to call in to question the selection of Edilson Nascimento showed your true colors. You then followed that up with arguments that further revealed your racist mentality.
Also, one does not have to use epithets to show prejudice. Remember, this is a gay-oriented site. As such, many of the people here have experienced bigotry that was not expressed through direct use of homophobic language.
You can pretend that you aren’t a racist but that doesn’t meant that you won’t be called out for it.
Ultimately, you are no different than the homophobes who freak out and scream about “diversity” when a gay white male character appears on TV show. You use the same language and strategy that Ken Dobson uses against GLBT Americans.
Dec 2, 2008 at 2:49 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 132 ·
dvlaries · Member · 1048 comments
Speaking of men of color, yeah, let’s have some.
Think you could find some with the age and looks of, say, Kevin Robinson of the Weather Channel…? :-)
http://www.weather.com/tv/pers....._pers_welc
I’LL jump up and down!
Dec 2, 2008 at 5:01 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
No. 137 ·
Michael W.
You’re damn right he can’t compare to Luke with his warm smile, deeply chiseled hunky body and beautiful blond hair. That’s why Japhy left him as the last Morning Goods selection to be posted at the top of the page while Julio Iglesias or whatever is hung out to dry.
Dec 2, 2008 at 11:27 pm · @Reply · Flag
· Flag
Add your Comment
You R-O-C-K, Japhy!