I can see it now, eh?

[Scat]

... Chenoweth babe (I don't know who she is, but apparently some kinda celebrity)...

 

[sirkickyass]

She was very good in Pushing Daisies and Leonard Bernstein's operatic interpretation of "Candide."

 

[Hopper]

Suddenly, Marcus, for some damn reason, I'm startin to put a little more credence into anything she says, ya know?

 

[Scat]

Suddenly, Marcus, for some damn reason, I'm startin to put a little more credence into anything she says, ya know?

Can you list a couple of reasons for this?

 

[Hopper]

Can you list a couple of reasons for this?

It's all a little too subtle to be broke-down, analytical-like, eh, Marcus? Just kinda a "feelin," I git, know what I'm sayin?

That said, if I wuz forced to give two reasons, on pain of death, then I would say there are two obvious reasons in that pic, right above where it says "the premier."

 

[sirkickyass]

That said, if I wuz forced to give two reasons, on pain of death, then I would say there are two obvious reasons in that pic, right above where it says "the premier."

Apparently you are distracted enough that you are having difficulty reading. I believe the text reads "The Piemaker" which is probably a Pushing Daisies reference.

 

[Hopper]

Apparently you are distracted enough that you are having difficulty reading. I believe the text reads "The Piemaker" which is probably a Pushing Daisies reference.

Piemaker!? All the more better, eh!?

Can't resist this here edit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=468XodYBFBc

 

[One Brow]

Whether I agree with him, or not, isn't even the point.

That's why I didn't ask.

I take him at his word that these are his honest opinions

As do I.

and I cannot even remotely see how his opinions are a mere product of homophobia.

If you meant that can't even see how bigotry can explain the two discordant interpretations of the same performance by the same person, with the primary difference being a knowledge of the actor's orientation, than I find such a claim very difficult to believe and not at all in line with your usual posting. So, perhaps you could reword that position? Otherwise, if you could offer any reasonable alternative for saying the same performance has to interpreted very differently depending on the orientation of the actor (as opposed to the character), I'm all ears.

Now these two, the second one first: That's not even the claim he makes, is it? Have you read his article (which I have cited) or are you just goin on how the gay blogs had chosen to characterize his claims?

I have not read any gay blogs, just "Straight Jacket".

Now the first one: Then why this does Chenoweth babe (I don't know who she is, but apparently some kinda celebrity and a co-star with the paricular actor criticized) make such a claim? Why would the gay bloggers stir up an outrage to the point where this writer is gittin all kinda hate mail, and stuff? What is the motive here? What is the agenda?

To point out obvious bigotry, perhaps.

 

[Hopper]

If you meant that can't even see how bigotry can explain the two discordant interpretations of the same performance by the same person, with the primary difference being a knowledge of the actor's orientation, than I find such a claim very difficult to believe and not at all in line with your usual posting. So, perhaps you could reword that position? Otherwise, if you could offer any reasonable alternative for saying the same performance has to interpreted very differently depending on the orientation of the actor (as opposed to the character), I'm all ears.

I'm sure whatever you're tryin to say here makes sense to you, Eric, but it don't to me. You wouldn't be the first gay (or other kind of) advocate to claim that 1. "You don't share my values and opinions" is identical to 2. "You are an utter bigot." The author himself says this, for what it's worth: "Just rewatch the scene where he’s wading around in a bubble bath by himself." I have no idea what that scene is, but I can imagine it. As with any topic, if you have been fooled, you re-evaluate things after gittin wised up. This guy aint sayin that Hudson wasn't convincin, as you seem to claim. He's just sayin it's all viewed differently if you later find out he has no attraction to women whatsover, despite deceptive appearances in the movie.

To point out obvious bigotry, perhaps.

If that's the best you can come up with, I won't even bother responding.

 

[One Brow]

I'll start by saying this: having now read "Out of Focus", it seems the author now explains he was trying to say that he saw mainstream America as having the opinions expressed, and the opinions in "Straight Talk" may not be his opinions personally (he was not particularly clear on that point, but it seemed to be the jist of it). To the degree that is true, "Straight Talk" seems to have been a poorly worded article, but the author would not be as bigoted as the thoughts you see in "Straight Talk".

I'm sure whatever you're tryin to say here makes sense to you, Eric, but it don't to me.

I may downgrade my opinion of you, then. If you can't even comprehend a request to offer a possbile explanation for a difference in perception as stated by the author, that's a serious gap. It's more believable the obtuseness is deliberate.

You wouldn't be the first gay (or other kind of) advocate to claim that 1. "You don't share my values and opinions" is identical to 2. "You are an utter bigot."

I don't recall making such a claim, regardles of whether I would be the first.

The author himself says this, for what it's worth: "Just rewatch the scene where he’s wading around in a bubble bath by himself." I have no idea what that scene is, but I can imagine it. As with any topic, if you have been fooled, you re-evaluate things after gittin wised up. This guy aint sayin that Hudson wasn't convincin, as you seem to claim. He's just sayin it's all viewed differently if you later find out he has no attraction to women whatsover, despite deceptive appearances in the movie.

I don't see why, other than bigotry. By comparison, Debra Winger and Richjard Gere really disliked each other when making An Officer and a Gentleman. I've never heard anyone say that turns the movie into a farce because the leads had no sexual chemistry off-screen.

If that's the best you can come up with, I won't even bother responding.

If you have something better to offer, I'm listening.

 

[Hopper]

I'll start by saying this: having now read "Out of Focus", it seems the author now explains he was trying to say that he saw mainstream America as having the opinions expressed, and the opinions in "Straight Talk" may not be his opinions personally (he was not particularly clear on that point, but it seemed to be the jist of it). To the degree that is true, "Straight Talk" seems to have been a poorly worded article, but the author would not be as bigoted as the thoughts you see in "Straight Talk".

Careless reading does not necessarily imply poor wording, eh, Eric? The original article says things like this: "This is no laughing matter, however. For decades, Hollywood has kept gay actors—Tab Hunter, Van Johnson, Richard Chamberlain, Rock Hudson, etc.—in the closet, to their detriment. The fear was, if people knew your sexual orientation, you could never work again. Thankfully, this seems ridiculous in the era of Portia de Rossi and Neil Patrick Harris. But the truth is, openly gay actors still have reason to be scared."

Read all the "horrendous homophobia" or "bigotry" into that that you want, I just don't see it.

I may downgrade my opinion of you, then. If you can't even comprehend a request to offer a possbile explanation for a difference in perception as stated by the author, that's a serious gap. It's more believable the obtuseness is deliberate.

I gave an alternate explanation. You can agree with it, or not, suit yourself. However, the mere presupposition that "only" bigotry could possibly explain such a thing seems very narrow-minded and prejudicial to me.

If you have something better to offer, I'm listening.

OK, see next post.

 

[Archie Moses]

Will you two (err one) quit arguing with yourself?