Brokeback Propaganda

[ZEB]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
vroom wrote:
At what point do you stand up and voice an opinion? And perhaps say, “I don’t like this movie simply because of the content?”

Perhaps you NEVER do…and that’s fine for you. But many of us are of a different opinion.

Zeb,

Perhaps you should reread the first post. This thread is NOT about whether or not someone likes the subject or content of the movie.

It is about claiming that the movie is merely propaganda.

If the thread was about not liking the movie, there would be nothing at all to talk about…

I’m responding to the haters on the thread vroom. And I will continue to do so vroom.

Aren’t the haters the ones claiming that a movie should not be made because of the content?[/quote]

I’m not claiming it should not have been made. And no I don’t think if someone voices an opinion regarding content that they are “hating.” It’s still America and we are allowed to disaprove of a movie for whatever reason.

Mostly the haters are the ones who attack and name call when someone does not agree with their view point.

As you can see on this thread it’s not those who don’t like the movie who are full of hate. Well, no you probably won’t see that, and if you do, you probably won’t admit it.

But nonetheless it’s true.

The thread starter took it upon himself to claim that a movie he never even saw was propoganda simply because he disagreed with the content and the content was not shown in an absolute negative light. How are people “hating” if they point out the faults in this line of thinking?

Have you seen every film produced by the Nazi’s? No? Niether have I but I know that they are full of propaganda. It’s not a huge stretch for anyone of sound mind to understand that Hollywood is liberal and many are rather extreme.

[ZEB]

[quote]vroom wrote:
I’m responding to the haters on the thread vroom. And I will continue to do so vroom.

LOL.

Well, you keep right on going there missy, I’m not trying to stop you.

However, I thought perhaps you’d at least like to discuss the same issues that everyone else was discussing.

My bad.[/quote]

Yes vroom you are “bad.” Bad at selectivly pointing out who YOU think is not “on topic.”

Is this on topic:

[quote]The fact that you equate two (grown) men having a sexual relationship to child molesting shows you to be an asshole and an idiot.

Peace be with you.[/quote]

But darn you forgot to point it out!

So…yes you are a bad boy vroomy…No Metabolic Drive shake for you tonight

[vroom]

But darn you forgot to point it out!

When you start policing the right, I will listen to your moralizing about my need to police the left…

Oops!

[ZEB]

[quote]vroom wrote:
So what makes it propaganda is it’s uneven presentation of the gay condition.

Other than the fact that some people object to it, what is negative about the gay condition?[/quote]

Oh vroom…we have been all through this on other threads. You really want to rehash it again? I don’t think it’s “on topic.” But, if you want we can do it again. I still have all of the links.

Let’s start with this fact from the Center for Disease Control (CDC):

“An estimated 503,305 MSM (Men who have sex with men)… accounting for 67% of all men and 54% of all people who received a diagnosis of AIDS”

That, I would say is very negative regarding the “gay condition.”

See for yourself:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/msm.htm

[ZEB]

[quote]vroom wrote:

…there is no reason that gay people can’t also practice safe sex. [/quote]

True vroom, but the sad part is while the CDC and every other health institution and the media have been preaching “safe sex” it has fallen on deaf ears in the gay community.

Again, look at the stats. They are not listening brother!

[ZEB]

[quote]vroom wrote:
But darn you forgot to point it out!

When you start policing the right, I will listen to your moralizing about my need to police the left…

Oops![/quote]

LOL…okay you keep an eye on my side and I’ll keep an eye on yours.

[ALDurr]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda? [/quote]

Actually, that was done before. Anyone remember “Philadelphia”? I was forced to see it. Depressed the shit out of me. There have been several others too, but that is the first I could remember.

[Professor_X]

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Professor X wrote:
So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda?

Actually, that was done before. Anyone remember “Philadelphia”? I was forced to see it. Depressed the shit out of me. There have been several others too, but that is the first I could remember.[/quote]

I remember that. That one time was the last time I watched it. There is only so much pain, suffering and death I can handle for two hours.

[ALDurr]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
harris447 wrote:
stellar_horizon wrote:
warlock wrote:
Do you have friends?

Do you want a hug?

Why do you need so much attention?

w

Lorisco should be asking you these questions. You have nothing insightful to provide to this thread and despite the fact that you appear to be liberated from religious ethics and testify of a black heritage, your comments are offending to homosexuals and African Americans alike.

Are you black? If not, how can you claim to speak as to whether or not African-Americans are offended.

There are quite a few black guys on this forum and none of them have taken offense.

I would be far more interested to hear what they have to say than what you do.

Excellent point! So are they silent because it really isn’t offense to them or because their PC or political bias is more important than their racial perspective?

There is nothing more offensive to me then YOU or anyone else acting as if you know what I should be getting offended about and when I should show it. That act alone shows you think you are superior to me and need to inform me when I should be upset about something. You are the last person who needs to be speaking about what offends black people.

You don’t want us non-blacks to answer for you, great. I can totally respect that.

Now cut the shit and answer the question for yourself. As a black person, does it offend you or not and why?

It is none of your concern either way. It will forever be a huge mystery to you as to why not one other black person on this board (of which there are at least three who are regular responders and even more of mixed heritage) has responded.
[/quote]

I haven’t been on this forum for a while, so when I came across this topic, I thought it was stupid and not worth replying to. Then I saw how others think that black people should be offended by this remark, as if we don’t have enough people outside our race trying to tell us what we should think, feel, say, act and believe. This became compounded by juvenile taunts to try to get a response from us. Then, when they didn’t get what they want, the name-calling came out. Why would anyone of us want to engage in this nonsense with any of them if they are displaying such high levels of stupidity and a severe lack of maturity?

I got an idea, the next time they come across a statement like this, why don’t they try the following: “Hey, this statement seems to me like it could be offensive to black people, but since I don’t know for sure and its not my place to decide for you if it is offensive, let me ask you your opinion. Do you find this statement offensive?”

Do you think they would see the difference? The above shows a true interest in learning. The attempts that have been done so far basically translates to “We think you should be offended because we know more about you than you do. If you don’t agree, we are going to try to argue you to death until you agree or get pissed off. Either way, we are in control and we win!”

What do you think ProfX, harris447? Am I accurate so far?

[harris447]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Professor X wrote:
So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda?

Actually, that was done before. Anyone remember “Philadelphia”? I was forced to see it. Depressed the shit out of me. There have been several others too, but that is the first I could remember.

I remember that. That one time was the last time I watched it. There is only so much pain, suffering and death I can handle for two hours.[/quote]

FoxNews does “O’Reilly” and “Hannity and Colmes” back to back every night.

[ALDurr]

[quote]harris447 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Professor X wrote:
So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda?

Actually, that was done before. Anyone remember “Philadelphia”? I was forced to see it. Depressed the shit out of me. There have been several others too, but that is the first I could remember.

I remember that. That one time was the last time I watched it. There is only so much pain, suffering and death I can handle for two hours.

FoxNews does “O’Reilly” and “Hannity and Colmes” back to back every night.
[/quote]

Now that’s pain!

[Professor_X]

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
harris447 wrote:
stellar_horizon wrote:
warlock wrote:
Do you have friends?

Do you want a hug?

Why do you need so much attention?

w

Lorisco should be asking you these questions. You have nothing insightful to provide to this thread and despite the fact that you appear to be liberated from religious ethics and testify of a black heritage, your comments are offending to homosexuals and African Americans alike.

Are you black? If not, how can you claim to speak as to whether or not African-Americans are offended.

There are quite a few black guys on this forum and none of them have taken offense.

I would be far more interested to hear what they have to say than what you do.

Excellent point! So are they silent because it really isn’t offense to them or because their PC or political bias is more important than their racial perspective?

There is nothing more offensive to me then YOU or anyone else acting as if you know what I should be getting offended about and when I should show it. That act alone shows you think you are superior to me and need to inform me when I should be upset about something. You are the last person who needs to be speaking about what offends black people.

You don’t want us non-blacks to answer for you, great. I can totally respect that.

Now cut the shit and answer the question for yourself. As a black person, does it offend you or not and why?

It is none of your concern either way. It will forever be a huge mystery to you as to why not one other black person on this board (of which there are at least three who are regular responders and even more of mixed heritage) has responded.

I haven’t been on this forum for a while, so when I came across this topic, I thought it was stupid and not worth replying to. Then I saw how others think that black people should be offended by this remark, as if we don’t have enough people outside our race trying to tell us what we should think, feel, say, act and believe. This became compounded by juvenile taunts to try to get a response from us. Then, when they didn’t get what they want, the name-calling came out. Why would anyone of us want to engage in this nonsense with any of them if they are displaying such high levels of stupidity and a severe lack of maturity?

I got an idea, the next time they come across a statement like this, why don’t they try the following: “Hey, this statement seems to me like it could be offensive to black people, but since I don’t know for sure and its not my place to decide for you if it is offensive, let me ask you your opinion. Do you find this statement offensive?”

Do you think they would see the difference? The above shows a true interest in learning. The attempts that have been done so far basically translates to “We think you should be offended because we know more about you than you do. If you don’t agree, we are going to try to argue you to death until you agree or get pissed off. Either way, we are in control and we win!”

What do you think ProfX, harris447? Am I accurate so far?[/quote]

I am just amazed that it needs to be said. I am now told what I should be offended by. WTF? Who is the real racist in that situation?

[Lorisco]

[quote]orion wrote:
Lorisco wrote:

You got that a little wrong hoss! The reason it is propaganda is not because it doesn’t show being gay in a negative light. It’s because it doesn’t show that it is negative at all. When an issue is presented that only shows part of the truth, and not all of it, that is bias or propaganda. So what makes it propaganda is it’s uneven presentation of the gay condition.

Bullshit.

If that was true, every movie, article or book that does not cover every aspect of a problem/situation is propaganda.

Your use of the word propaganda makes the word meaningless.

Like the Mona Lisa is propaganda because it focuses on her face and smile and not on her ass.

A pfffft to you Sir!

[/quote]

You need to look up the definition of “propaganda”. But until then, yes, that is true. Most movies present the authors, directors, or producers perspective on an issue. And unless they try hard to make it unbiased, it will be. And that is ok. We have to just realize that and move one.

I never stated that brokeback was the only biased move. It’s just that you eggheads here seem to think it, and another movies, aren’t biased. And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Lorisco]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
vroom wrote:
So what makes it propaganda is it’s uneven presentation of the gay condition.

Other than the fact that some people object to it, what is negative about the gay condition?

Well, not to start this debate up again, but statistics show gays with a much higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases and depression than straights by percent of population. So that alone would indicate some negative aspects of the condition or lifestyle.

So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda? [/quote]

Don’t put words in my posts. No! They need to show the good and the bad to be not biased. That is all I’m saying. Just both sides.

[Professor_X]

[quote]Lorisco wrote:

Don’t put words in my posts. No! They need to show the good and the bad to be not biased. That is all I’m saying. Just both sides.
[/quote]

How do you know they didn’t?

[vroom]

Lorisco,

We are still waiting to hear what the bad side is that needs be shown. What was left out that would turn this into a documentary in your opinion?

[harris447]

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
vroom wrote:
So what makes it propaganda is it’s uneven presentation of the gay condition.

Other than the fact that some people object to it, what is negative about the gay condition?

Well, not to start this debate up again, but statistics show gays with a much higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases and depression than straights by percent of population. So that alone would indicate some negative aspects of the condition or lifestyle.

So, you wanted a movie to focus on them getting diseases and being depressed? Any focus on them not getting diseases and not being depressed is propoganda?

Don’t put words in my posts. No! They need to show the good and the bad to be not biased. That is all I’m saying. Just both sides.
[/quote]

Do you even KNOW the difference between art and journalism, fucknuts?

Ang Lee is under no obligation whatsoever to show both sides. He’s telling a story.

You knew that, right?

[Lorisco]

[quote]vroom wrote:
You haven’t shown any negatives with respect to the gay lifestyle, you’ve shown that those with that lifestyle might bear some additional risk factors. There is a difference between these concepts you know.
[/quote]
Don’t split hairs. If you don’t play nice I’m going to get Uncle Zeb in here and he will bury you with statistics of just what percentage of gays get disease because of their lifestyle. And since it is a significant percentage, not talking about that in an unbiased way would be biased.

Also, it isn’t fair to say that these are even inherent risk factors if it is mainstream society that is in some way causing them, with respect to depression for example. People tend to get depressed when they are ostracized.

Sure, if society is the cause.

Finally, there is no reason that gay people can’t also practice safe sex. Come on, do you have any real negatives, other than flat out dislike for the lifestyle.

That’s right buddy-boy. There is no reason why they can’t practice safe sex. So explain to me why they aren’t? Explain to me why they know this and yet have a much higher incidence of HIV/AIDS?

[quote]
I mean, I don’t like it either… it is revolting, but it seriously has no impact on my own life. It is none of my own business.[/quote]

But what about our date?

[Lorisco]

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
It is none of your concern either way. It will forever be a huge mystery to you as to why not one other black person on this board (of which there are at least three who are regular responders and even more of mixed heritage) has responded.

I haven’t been on this forum for a while, so when I came across this topic, I thought it was stupid and not worth replying to. Then I saw how others think that black people should be offended by this remark, as if we don’t have enough people outside our race trying to tell us what we should think, feel, say, act and believe. This became compounded by juvenile taunts to try to get a response from us. Then, when they didn’t get what they want, the name-calling came out. Why would anyone of us want to engage in this nonsense with any of them if they are displaying such high levels of stupidity and a severe lack of maturity?

I got an idea, the next time they come across a statement like this, why don’t they try the following: “Hey, this statement seems to me like it could be offensive to black people, but since I don’t know for sure and its not my place to decide for you if it is offensive, let me ask you your opinion. Do you find this statement offensive?”

Do you think they would see the difference? The above shows a true interest in learning. The attempts that have been done so far basically translates to “We think you should be offended because we know more about you than you do. If you don’t agree, we are going to try to argue you to death until you agree or get pissed off. Either way, we are in control and we win!”

What do you think ProfX, harris447? Am I accurate so far?[/quote]

So I guess there is just no winning with you guys. Things that would offend other races apparently don’t offend you. Or maybe it is who stated it? If a white guy or someone else made that statement all hell would break loose. But if someone from your own community states it than we non-blacks are the racists for even bring it up. That’s just great. And you wonder why there is still racism. Well here is a good example.

I believe that most people are not racists and want to get along with all, but with double standards like these it makes it very difficult.

[Lorisco]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:

Don’t put words in my posts. No! They need to show the good and the bad to be not biased. That is all I’m saying. Just both sides.

How do you know they didn’t?[/quote]

How do you know they do?