One Man Men

[Brown Eyes]

Is this really an example of intollerence, or a victory of equality?  I think in some ways lesbians enjoy more acceptance than gay men.  I'm happy to be argued with, but I ask you, would the adoption outcome above been the same if it were two men???

Amanda?  What do you think?

Heya,

I don't believe for a minute that lesbians are more accepted than gay men.  Cultural attitudes and the kinds of homophobia leveled at men vs. women might be different but I truly don't believe there's more acceptance for lesbians (real lesbians I mean - refering to my post above... very different from horrible fantasy-lesbians... the product of a special and very nuanced form of homophobia).  Years ago I was in a coming out support group for women only and our group leader used to talk about the issue of "compounded oppressions."  This led to discussions of what it means as an individual to deal with all the misogyny that any and all women need to deal with combined with homophobia.  And then this can be expanded if one happens to be of a different ethnic group, religion, etc.  No.  There's nothing easy about being a gay woman.  I still wouldn't trade it for anything though.  It's amazing how powerful all of this can be... the sense of oppression and the determination to not let it get you down... 

For me the dominant concern is usually the misogyny first and then the homophobia.  The two are very much interconnected for lesbians, but in lots of ways I find the misogyny to be much more degrading, horrible, infuriating and ever-present.  I can go about my day to day life without many people guessing I'm a lesbian, but I always have to deal with the prejudices that all women face.  This is just my take on the situation.  I'm sure every lesbian would have different and personalized responses to this question.

I have no real knowledge or opinion on the specific issue of adoption that would be different or more informed than any of you.  I haven't really thought too much about it since it hasn't been an issue in my life or in my friends lives (yet).

 

[alec716]

This anxiety about what true lesbianism means seems to come out when people (some straight men, some straight women, etc.) act like they don't understand how two women can really have sex.  That, almost willful act of not-understanding reveals every aspect of cultural insecurity as far as I'm concerned.

Amanda, I very much like your phrasing here -- "almost willful act(s) of not understanding" provide the fertile soil for so very many acts of biogtry, IMHO.  Thanks for pinpointing this link in the chain of intolerance. 

(note:  I tried putting square brackets around the "s" in "acts" to be all grammatically proper and ever'thing, but the forum software ended up putting a strike line through the rest of my text!  Not that people do not occasionally want to strike out what I say, but that's another story.    )

[jessiwrite]

I am only what, six months behind, lol.  It's taken me about that long to get up enough nerve to post on forums.  I've read every post of this thread tonight and some excellent ones.  I agree with lots, disagree with some but have sure learned a heap.
I do not like labels and will not, don't even know if it's possible, to label Jack and Ennis.  I know they only truly loved one person in their lives and that was each other. 
The only post that bothered me a little was doubting Jake's sincerity, but everyone is welcomed to their opinions. I don't think he would lie for Focus after taking on that role, just doesn't seem in his character.  I heard an interview where he said nearly those exact words. 
They both enjoyed being with women, functioned fine with females, but their heart and soul didn't belong to those ladies. If they had never met could they have loved their wives and been happy, sexually and emotionally, I don't think we can know the answer to that.  I'd bet my pony though that Ennis would never have had an ounce of attraction to a man if he had never known Jack.
And I feel all alone, missed so much, too late for the party.

jessi

[Aussie Chris]

I am only what, six months behind, lol.  It's taken me about that long to get up enough nerve to post on forums.  I've read every post of this thread tonight and some excellent ones.  I agree with lots, disagree with some but have sure learned a heap.

Hi Jessi, congratulations on taking the plunge!  Well differences of opinion are part of what makes BetterMostians such and interesting group to be around.  I don't think anyone was seriously accusing Jake of being insincere, or at least I wasn't, but I think I can safely accuse him of being a straight man who is just as susceptible to fear as the rest of us.  Waaaay back in the beginning, no one knew if BbM was going to be accepted by the public or would turn into a C.E.M. (career ending move) for everyone involved.  I completely understand that both Jake and Heath had to walk a fine line when being interviewed and describing the characters and their motivations.  But there's no doubt that Focus decided to promote BbM with stills that only showed the men separately or on horseback or with the women.  They too (Focus) didn't know how the film would be accepted so they went with what they knew and that's to be conservative with the gay issues and themes.  For GLBT folk who constantly struggle with being accepted and/or the "covering" that comes with intolerance, any consolation or condition on the themes could be at best disappointing and at worst a betrayal.  These are not pleasant thoughts however, so I simply keep reminding myself that we're all only human and just let them go, or simply go and watch BbM again and bask in the truth that lies in the performances.

[serious crayons]

For GLBT folk who constantly struggle with being accepted and/or the "covering" that comes with intolerance, any consolation or condition on the themes could be at best disappointing and at worst a betrayal.  These are not pleasant thoughts however, so I simply keep reminding myself that we're all only human and just let them go, or simply go and watch BbM again and bask in the truth that lies in the performances.

That's a good attitude, Chris. I completely understand what you mean about it feeling disappointing or like a betrayal. I think a good way to look at it is to keep in mind that Focus made the movie -- one that a lot of studios apparently wouldn't take on. And that if their marketing methods were questionable, their hearts probably were in the right place: they wanted the movie to draw the widest possible audience, and they felt that was the way to do it. I don't know if they were correct about that or not, but if so the blame mainly lies with the audience rather than the filmmakers. And the more people who see the film and can appreciate it, the less studios would have to rely on those tactics, hopefully, in the future.

[jessiwrite]

I know Focus had pushed what they thought would sell, Ang lee tried to down play gay sex (I don't know a better term, sorry) in the movie and was in line with Focus in the ads.  I do believe the statemens the actors made were their own, whether it be about kissing or the character's sexuality.  It was to them, and many more, first and foremost about the love the characters had for each other and sex being part of the love.
Jack did like women, and I saw lots of evidence of that, lots of it from waving to the girls in the stand to dancing with LaSHawn, the movie Jack may have been on that scale much more straight than even bi.  The book Jack liked men more, I think, but still could enjoy being with a woman.  Jake was playing the movie Jack, and there is a pretty big differecne in the two characters, from buck teeth, small frame to being gay or straight.  Jake played the character straight, a man who fell in love with a man.  He didn't go all the way to Mexico for sexual relief.  Ang Lee directed him as gay, he believed Jack to be gay and he saiid he got the performance he wanted. Jake's Jack came through, to me, more clearly as Ang's. 

jessi

[Marge_Innavera]

I just feel like elaborating) is that there's a vast difference between straight male fantasies of woman-on-woman action (of the sort you mention, a la Married With Children and countless other pop culture references such as Howard Stern, etc. and porn, etc.) and the true threat/ fear that real and actual lesbianism brings out culturally... which is the fear of women being completely independent of men in terms of being self-sufficient in terms of supporting ourselves AND EVEN sexually

You bet. That's why the Al Bundys of the world find lesbian sex acceptable "as long as there's a man watching" - it's still in that comfortable (to them) familiar context of a man being involved and getting sexual satisfaction out of it.

[serious crayons]

Ang lee tried to down play gay sex (I don't know a better term, sorry) in the movie

Do you mean Ang did this in marketing or in the actual movie? In the movie, and I guess this is all in the eye of the beholder, I think he played it up fairly well. Half an hour in, there's a semi-explicit sex scene. The scene doesn't shift to the outside of the tent or anything coy. It was like, take it or leave it, this is what the movie's about.

What he did in interviews or marketing I'm not as familiar with.

He didn't go all the way to Mexico for sexual relief. 

I'm curious, what do you feel he did go to Mexico for, Jessi?

[Marge_Innavera]

Hi there Marge_Innavera, so tell me, who is this dominant group?  Do you mean straight men?  Can they really be considered dominant?  Strange, I always saw them as victims of their own narrow minds.

It might be that straight heterosexual men aren't the dominant group; that is, if you live on another planet.  My statement was not ambiguous.

Is this really an example of intollerence, or a victory of equality?

 

I tend to agree with some of the other posters who replied; that there's somewhat more tolerance but that this is rooted in the perception of women, and by extension their sexuality, as being of lesser importance.

  I'm happy to be argued with, but I ask you, would the adoption outcome above been the same if it were two men???

In this case it would have, as the legal basis was the nullifying of anti-sodomy laws that were still on the books; and added to that the specific standards for foster parents. But in terms of PR it might have been fortunate that this case, a landmark one for my state, involved two women.

The Attorney General's office in Missouri did a lot of stamping and peeing on trees following that decision, one spokesperson even saying that they were going to insist that the childrens' parents have the right to object to their children being fostered by gays. A representative of the State department of families and children wrote a very sharp rebuke to that in the Kansas City Star, pointing out that in the vast majority of cases children are being fostered because the parents are a threat to the child's health, safety and welfare.  They were not, consequently, going to have any say in what foster homes their children would go to.

[jessiwrite]

Do you mean Ang did this in marketing or in the actual movie? In the movie, and I guess this is all in the eye of the beholder, I think he played it up fairly well. Half an hour in, there's a semi-explicit sex scene. The scene doesn't shift to the outside of the tent or anything coy. It was like, take it or leave it, this is what the movie's about.

What he did in interviews or marketing I'm not as familiar with.

I'm curious, what do you feel he did go to Mexico for, Jessi?

I think he and Focus made sure they were in line with each other. I think he gave us no more then he thought he must, concernting the m/m sex, and made sure he added m/f sex enough to perhaps ease more people.  After the reunion we have to really use our imaginations or sump'in, to feel they had sex.  In the book, last time together, she makes it clear they had sex and it was still passionate, in the movie they are far enough apart in front of that fire to have to reach an arm's length to take the pot and in the tent there are no signs of anything other than quietly going to sleep.  The arm over shoulder lets me know Ennis is fond of him, but sure no sparks except in my head.
It isn't just about two boys/young men being in love and hot for each other, it covers many more years and I feel, by so downplaying the sex, he took a lot away from their relationship.


I think Jack went to Mexico because he had a brokenheart, loss hope and been cruely rejected.  If it had been Ennis he'd probably pounded his hand into the dashboard, gone to a bar and try to give pain to get lots of pain.  Going to that hooker was probably much more painful for Jack, how it must of hurt.  And yeah, some spite in it too I bet, but I don't think it was for the sex.

It is a joy to be discussing Jack and Ennis, a pure joy.  All this is purely my thoughts, I tend to get passionate with these boys, please I never mean any disrespect to anyone, ever.

jessi