Why are we like this?

[serious crayons]

To make a long story short, he ended up getting murdered. No one was ever charged, but apparently everyone knew who did it. I guess the public seemed to think it was justifiable homicide.

The second event is just now unfolding ... my nephew. I am sure he is gay. My brother has made it clear about his disdain for homosexuals. When I told my brother that I loved BBM, he said he refused to watch a story about "two faggots". I absolutely cringed.

Dly, I am so sorry to hear about both of these family tragedies. Two more reminders that the lessons of Brokeback are still extremely relevant today (if we needed any reminders, that is, which most of us don't). Anyway, very sad stories. I am really sorry, and hope your nephew can find the support he needs from other caring adults, and that your brother will find a way to be more open-minded when it hits that close to home.

Just show there is some hope, I must add a quick OT aside about a happy story of a gay relative in my family. My aunt has lived with another woman for as long as I've been alive. For years, nobody in the family ever discussed whether they are gay, but it became increasingly clear to me over the years and now it's sort of almost openly obliquely referred to. In any case, everyone in the family has always been as welcoming to them as any married couple. Anyway, when my aunt and her roommate retired some years ago, they moved together to the roommate's hometown, a tiny farm town in Iowa. Not long after moving there -- two women living together in a big Victorian mansion -- my aunt decided to run for mayor. And she won, running against the incumbent, and went on to serve several successful terms! Of course, my aunt is very smart and funny and personable. But I was also always impressed that the townsfolk were able to set aside whatever prejudices they might have held (I realize two women living together are not as conspicuous as two men, but still) and vote her in as their leader.

I'm writing a dissertation on the subject of how and why narrative has the potential impact it does and what characteristics it needs to have to create that kind of response. Personally, I had the same type of reaction to another movie almost 10 years ago and the reactions others described back then were amazingly similar to those you'll find here.

What I'll be looking at is the neurological response people have to various types of narratives and trying to match that up with characteristics of the narrative and of the viewer. I've no doubt that other narratives have affected people similarly, I'm just not sure which or where to find people who've described their reaction.

Wow fontaine, you really DO have an interesting perspective. I will be looking forward to seeing more of your insights in the days and weeks to come. BTW, now I'm curious. You don't have to say if you don't want to, but what was the other movie 10 years ago?

[dly64]

Just show there is some hope, I must add a quick OT aside about a happy story of a gay relative in my family. My aunt has lived with another woman for as long as I've been alive. For years, nobody in the family ever discussed whether they are gay, but it became increasingly clear to me over the years and now it's sort of almost openly obliquely referred to. In any case, everyone in the family has always been as welcoming to them as any married couple. Anyway, when my aunt and her roommate retired some years ago, they moved together to the roommate's hometown, a tiny farm town in Iowa. Not long after moving there -- two women living together in a big Victorian mansion -- my aunt decided to run for mayor. And she won, running against the incumbent, and went on to serve several successful terms! Of course, my aunt is very smart and funny and personable. But I was also always impressed that the townsfolk were able to set aside whatever prejudices they might have held (I realize two women living together are not as conspicuous as two men, but still) and vote her in as their leader.

It is nice to see the acceptance of two women in such a way. It shows that we have come far in some areas ... other areas we are still in the dark ages. I wish more people would understand that homosexuality is not a disease and it is not a "mortal sin". I always figure that those who are the most outspoken really are hiding something of consequence in their lives. Just a theory ....

[fontaine]

It is nice to see the acceptance of two women in such a way. It shows that we have come far in some areas ... other areas we are still in the dark ages. I wish more people would understand that homosexuality is not a disease and it is not a "mortal sin". I always figure that those who are the most outspoken really are hiding something of consequence in their lives. Just a theory ....

I agree, dly64, that these people are hiding something from themselves, but I don't think it's necessarily what you're thinking it is. I doubt that sexual orientation is as straightforward as most people think it is. I expect there are many shades of gray between being "completely" heterosexual and "completely" homosexual. In fact, "completely" be even be a myth.

I just finished reading about a PhD biologist who has professionally evolved toward the mind/body relationship and has a theory that behavior is more a function of internal messages and environmental influences than it is of genes. These influences turn genes on and off. That makes sense given much of the other research I've been doing, but I have to look into it more. But, assuming he's onto something, even if someone had a heterosexual gene or a homosexual one, how he/she deals with it internally coupled with external, environmental/social influences, could set it in either an on or off state. Genes, I've long decided are our "default" settings but are not necessarily deterministic.

I think there are two kinds of sexual bigots: ones who are terrified that they might have a sexual orientation they've been taught to loathe, and ones without sexual ambiguity who are simply too narrow-minded, ignorant, and frightened to accept anything that does not echo their own belief systems. They are threatened by anything they think challenges their belief systems and will go to incredible lengths to advance and preserve them.

I suspect that deep down these people know they are full of it, and that makes them overly defensive. They not only wear their belief systems as a badge but try to foist them off on everyone else. The words tolerance and diversity are threatening to them.

It takes emotional courage to examine the possibility that maybe your beliefs aren't valid or that while they may be valid for you, they aren't necessarily for others. These are people whose belief systems rule their lives--lives which are lived in fear. Enter the Karl Roves of the world to take full advantage of those fears!

[fontaine]

Wow fontaine, you really DO have an interesting perspective. I will be looking forward to seeing more of your insights in the days and weeks to come. BTW, now I'm curious. You don't have to say if you don't want to, but what was the other movie 10 years ago?

It was (don't laugh) Titanic. When you think objectively about it, the similarities between it and Brokeback are striking from the theme of impossible love, to pristine, passionate filmmaking, and engaging characters who feel real and whom we come to care deeply for. Also, both movies are tragedies along the Romeo and Juliet line.

For a long time I thought I had a huge crush on Leonardo DiCaprio and finally realized it wasn't him, it was Jack Dawson who had stolen my aging heart. Who wouldn't want a partner like Jack--handsome, wise, talented, and devoted? And then there was the tragedy of an environment that worked against these characters ability to be together. I'm beginning to think that tragedy may be a key in why certain narratives have the power to move us to such depths.

I suspect that a lot of the anti-Titanic sentiment comes from it having become so popular, especially with young girls. What discriminating and sophisticated adult wants to be lumped in w/ a bunch of Leo-worshipping 13-year old girls? Me! 

[serious crayons]

Genes, I've long decided are our "default" settings but are not necessarily deterministic.

Good way to put it! I have an amateur's interest in the heredity vs. environment debate (and, as a writer, have written about it in a very laymanish way), and have looked at studies of twins reared apart and adopted kids, both of which aim to study separately the influences of nature vs. nurture. The general concensus at this point seems to be that human behavior is roughly half genetic, half environmental (the environmental part, interestingly, is not strongly correlated to parenting or family environment -- but that's a whole 'nother debate).

I think there are two kinds of sexual bigots: ones who are terrified that they might have a sexual orientation they've been taught to loathe, and ones without sexual ambiguity who are simply too narrow-minded, ignorant, and frightened to accept anything that does not echo their own belief systems.

This makes sense to me. After all, most racists don't fear they have black ancestors (though, of course, a few do fear this). It's possible to be narrow-minded and bigoted in an impersonal way. But I'm sure some homophobes fall into the "protesting too much" category.

For a long time I thought I had a huge crush on Leonardo DiCaprio and finally realized it wasn't him, it was Jack Dawson who had stolen my aging heart.

I know what you mean. I post regularly on the Heath Heath Heath thread and swoon over the pictures, but it's just for fun and camaraderie. It's really Ennis I care about, not Heath, and they're like two different people (the fact that they don't even LOOK much alike adds to that sense).

[fontaine]

Nor do Heath and Ennis sound alike! I was shocked when I watched the extras on the DVD to see how very different they are! It helped convince me how fine an actor Heath Ledger really is to have been able to make that kind and level of transformation. It may even support my theory that sexuality exists on a continuum. We may have certain "default" settings but a motivation like acting and portraying a different character may help an actor actually experience things he/she wouldn't while on their default setting.

Take the example of men (or women) in prison. Many straight ones participate in homosexual acts. You mean to tell me that ALL of these acts are simply physical w/ absolutely no emotional element? I find that hard to believe knowing how human beings function. It may be true for emotionally-stunted prisoners such as sociopaths but those can't feel much if any emotion for heterosexual partners, either.

I suspect that most homophobia is more the expression of the desire to return to a simpler, if mythical past where things were more black and white. I don't expect, however, that that resembles reality very much.

If you're interested in the nature/nurture, mind/body question, one of my instructors sent me a book (she's a sweetie and has done this several times) entitled "Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind" by Dr. V.S. Ramachandran, a noted neuroscientist. In it he talks a lot about "phantom limbs" and then gets into the mind/body relationship.To give you a preview of this guy's sense of humor, take the following paragraph that talks about quantitative vs. qualitative research.

"A tension exists in neurology between those who believe that the most valuable lessons about the brain can be learned from statistical analyses involving large numbers of patiens and those who believe that doing the right kind of experiements on the right patients--even a single patient--can yeild much more useful information. This is really a silly debate since its resolution is obvious: It's a good idea to begin with experiements on single cases and then to confirm the findings through studies of additional patients. By way of analogy, imagine that I cart a pig into your living room and tel you that it can talk. You might say, "Oh, really? Show me." I then wave my wand and the pig starts talking. You might respond, "My God! That's amazing!" You are not likely to say, "Ah, but that's just one pig. Show me a few more and then I might believe you." Yet this is precisely the attitude of many people in my field.

That paragraph cracked me up!

Uh, oh, I just read some more in the book that suggests a neurological basis of homophobia! Want to hear it?

[serious crayons]

Uh, oh, I just read some more in the book that suggests a neurological basis of homophobia! Want to hear it?

Um ... sure, I guess so!

Nor do Heath and Ennis sound alike! I was shocked when I watched the extras on the DVD to see how very different they are! It helped convince me how fine an actor Heath Ledger really is to have been able to make that kind and level of transformation.

Yes, he is an amazing actor, but get this -- I can't bring myself to watch the DVD extras for that very reason. Too confusing. For me, seeing Heath or the other actors in "real life" triggers disturbing thoughts that maybe Ennis and Jack aren't, well, real people.

I suspect that most homophobia is more the expression of the desire to return to a simpler, if mythical past where things were more black and white. I don't expect, however, that that resembles reality very much.

Good point. I think a lot of racism is the same way. It's a nostalgic look back to the '50s, when everybody was so repressed and/or oppressed that white middle-class straight people could almost forget that anybody else existed.

[YaadPyar]

I don't know why it took me so long to see this thread...  But it's the essential question - how has our experience of this movie connected us into a community that is so deeply feeling and supportive and in need of support. 

And I continue to not have an answer.  I like the idea that we're in need of love, but as was stated, who isn't in need of that.  I have read so many excellent answers and I would say yes and right and true to all of them, but they are not complete in their answers for me.  Not that I know the complete answer.

We are as different as we are similar.  For every way in which we are alike, you can see how we are not, and find 10,000 others just like us who were not deeply touched by this movie anyway.

So - no answers here, but enjoying reaching deeper still into the question, looking for answers at this point much more about myself and really much less about BBM.

[dly64]

Take the example of men (or women) in prison. Many straight ones participate in homosexual acts. You mean to tell me that ALL of these acts are simply physical w/ absolutely no emotional element? I find that hard to believe knowing how human beings function. It may be true for emotionally-stunted prisoners such as sociopaths but those can't feel much if any emotion for heterosexual partners, either.

I suspect that most homophobia is more the expression of the desire to return to a simpler, if mythical past where things were more black and white. I don't expect, however, that that resembles reality very much.

It is interesting that you bring up straight men and women participating in homosexual acts in prison. IMO, I doubt that there is any emotional attachment. Prison is an environment where it is the survival of the fittest. I guess I see it more as an issue of power and control than one of emotional or physical fulfillment.

I see homophobia as a fear of  examining one's own life. This does not mean the individual is homosexual (although s/he might be).  It is just that any prejudice has more to do with a person's own insecurity. For instance, a person who spouts off Bible verses about the damnation of homosexuals may be trying to convince him/ herself  that homosexuality is wrong. I find that those who protest too loudly have something they are trying to hide. For example, the loudest critics of President Clinton's indiscretions were having their own affairs. Another example: My dad grew up Amish and there was a guy who kept complaining to my grandpa that my aunt's (dad's sisters') skirts were too short. Coming to find out, he was molesting his own daughters. I could go on and on.

As for the nature/ nuture debate about homosexuality .... that could go on for decades. And, since we are humans, it is hard to separate what is inborn and what is environmental. It still hasn't been determined how one's personality is developed. I don't expect we will have any easy answers ... at least not in my lifetime!

[fontaine]

"I find that those who protest too loudly have something they are trying to hide. For example, the loudest critics of President Clinton's indiscretions were having their own affairs. Another example: My dad grew up Amish and there was a guy who kept complaining to my grandpa that my aunt's (dad's sisters') skirts were too short. Coming to find out, he was molesting his own daughters. I could go on and on."

Aren't those simply examples of hypocracy? Are you saying that when people loudly thump their causes its largely because they're hypocrites? I don't know but it certainly sounds very plausible. If these people focus on what others do and don't say and do, then they avoid having to look at themselves. Was that your point, dly64?