jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (76 posts)

Does Hollywood and the music industry have a 'gay agenda?'

  1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
    tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago

    The subject bar would not let me type in my whole question, so I chose the part of it that would get the most attention.  Below is the entire question and an explanation of it:

    DOES HOLLYWOOD HAVE A 'GAY AGENDA' OR IS HOMOSEXUALITY JUST THE NEW 'FAD?'

    I am a film major so naturally it is pretty obvious that I watch a lot of movies and television.  I also minor in Psychology so, if you are a follower of mine you may now understand where some of my thoughts come from.  If not I will explain.

    I analyze things.  I analyze what I watch, what I listen to, and what I feel, and then I try to answer the questions that arise in my head.  During the last year or so I have noticed that there is a lot of homosexuality displayed in most movies, television shows, and in the music industry.  Now, obviously homosexuals are not new, people have been gay since the beginning of time.  So homosexuality does not surprise me, but the current over saturation of it does. 

    Have you noticed every comedy in the movie theaters with a PG-13 rating or above has at least one 'gay scene?'  Some of these scenes are really graphic and I see a lot of young kids well below the age of 13 watching these movies with their families.  Do these parents know about the scene before hand?  Have you ever watched an original series on cable?  Don't even get me started on the premium channels (You might as well be watching porn). Have you seen some of these new music videos?  I think you get the point.

    At the end of the day I understand that homosexuality has to be portrayed in all forms of media that I described above, it is a part of our society, it always has been.  I am just wondering why is it thrown into everything now, even when it makes no sense.  It's like every comedy MUST have a gay scene, as if there is no other way to shock us anymore.  I think that may be  it!  Maybe all of these forms of media are using the popularity of homosexuality to increase there revenue just the way everyone was trying to find some way to make money of of Charlie Sheen when he was hot.  If I am correct and this is all due to our societies accelerated ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder), then what will they do when 'gay' is no longer shocking?  I leave this discussion open to you, and await your responses.

    1. Titen-Sxull profile image92
      Titen-Sxullposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Not that dressing in drag is inherently gay but you can go all the way back to the very beginning of film and comedy teams have always dressed in drag.

      The only agenda that gays have is to enjoy the same equal rights that heterosexual couples have always enjoyed (marriage with benefits). The way I see it the increase of gay characters is just to remind us that they exist and are still being oppressed (both here in America and around the world)

      "You might as well be watching porn"

      This is one of the biggest double-standards I see in ratings films, a PG-13 movie can get away with a TON of violence but little or no nudity and only sex scenes shot in a PG-13 safe way. Sex is perfectly natural and for most 13 year olds its a big topic of interest, of course overprotective puritan morons want to shield their children from everything for some reason. Letting a 13 year old watch a sex scene in a PG-13 movie can only be less damaging than letting them watch Darth Vader slice Luke's hand right off or watching black blood leak from an orc as an Elf's arrow impales it. In other words sex is far more harmless than violence, and yet the MPAA is far more comfortable allowing gratuitous violence than it is showing sex.

      1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
        tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        When I said
        "You might as well be watching porn," I was referring to certain shows on televisions premium channels, pay attention.

        Have you ever watched a show on HBO or SHOWTIME?  I love there shows but they sometimes overly incorporate sex into other wise well written and well acted shows for no reason other than the fact that, "sex sells."  I think it takes away from artistic integrity when a show is forced to do something just because the public wants it.  A real artist tells the public what it should want, not the other way around.  Too many folllowers in the world today.

        1. Titen-Sxull profile image92
          Titen-Sxullposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry, I must've missed that, but even so the point of HBO and Showtime is that they can be more candid about sex, they also have greater violent content as well

          Sex definitely sells but then there is a powerful pleasure incentive for human beings to engage in it that has evolved to help  us survive. Is it any wonder that sex sells? Besides kids shouldn't be watching those shows anyway and I fail to see how a sex scene detracts from a well written film unless it's just randomly thrown in solely for the sake of showing skin.

          From what I know of HBO they actually do show porn don't they? Mostly the soft-core kind if I recall.

          1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
            tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            "I fail to see how a sex scene detracts from a well written film unless it's just randomly thrown in solely for the sake of showing skin."

            I agree with this statement, unfortunately, these are the shows, episodes, movies, etc. that I am talking about.  The ones that do what you just said.

            1. Titen-Sxull profile image92
              Titen-Sxullposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              In that case they are indeed being low-brow but still how much judgment can we pass on them for that? And how do we know that they don't think the sex scene was crucial to the plot? They are the creators of this fictional reality, we shouldn't be too harsh when they express themselves openly on a channel that allows free expression.

              1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
                tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Have you ever watched True Blood Season 2?  I am a film major, trust me my frined, there are sex scenes in that season that are truly unnecessary.  They even made an adjustment to fall back on the sex scenes in season 3.

    2. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      It's partly an agenda, and it's partly ignorance.  Hollywood stars may be rich and famous, but that doesn't mean they've taken the time and made the effort to actually consider the fact that this issue is NOT a civil rights issue.   Apparently some of them have time to get liposuction and such, but not time to ponder morality.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I'm sure they have pondered morality.  Like all other rational beings, they reject the hatred and intolerance that a bunch of ignorant bigots cling to as a moral code.

      2. I am DB Cooper profile image67
        I am DB Cooperposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Is it immoral to be homosexual?

        1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
          tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Damn, I love the name man!  Where is the money hidden?  LOL.

          What is Morality?  To some people stealing is like telling a white lie for others it makes them sick to their stomach to even think about it.  Morality is a law based on society, and at the present time homosexuality seems to be getting pretty close to being morally accepted.

          1. I am DB Cooper profile image67
            I am DB Cooperposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I think this is the heart of the matter. It's unfair for Brenda to claim a Hollywood star who is in a homosexual scene on TV or in a movie has not taken the time to ponder the morality of such a decision. Morality goes far beyond what is written in the Bible, and "proper behavior" has had a malleable definition for thousands of years.

    3. thisisoli profile image62
      thisisoliposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Well cross dressing has been done, there's gotta be something left!

    4. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I know usually I always joke around in any thread you put up, but I think with this topic, you're going to see me give you more of a serious response.  First of all, I understand where you're coming from on this, and I can see what you're getting at, but I have to respectively disagree with you.  Although I'm not a film major like you, I do watch a lot of movies and analyze them a lot, as you can probably tell if you read any of my hubs. 

      However, I'm a bit surprised as a film student, you don't tend to realize that even though Hollywood does provide entertainment, but they're also a business as well.  And I'm sure we both know that the target audience of most movies and tv shows are often geared towards teens, tweens and young college students, right?  After all, that's where the money is if you're a Hollywood producer trying to market your product.  Now that we've established that, we can go on to what I'm about to say.

      If you go back to the Vietnam War era, you'll notice that most films have a common theme about rebellion in society, right?  I know that has nothing to do with homosexuality, but I'm about to make a very good point if you read on.  Sorry, I usually have to give out long winded answers in order to get my point across, so I hope you bear with me.  Anyways, back in the Vietnam era, a lot of young youths were against the war in Vietnam, and as a result there were a lot of anti war protests.  Thus, the film industry had a lot of films that promoted anti establishment symbolisms to appeal to what was popular among young people at the time.  I'm sure many Hollywood producers didn't like the idea, but they released films like that anyway.  Why?  Because it was about making money, and that's why they did it to appease their audience. 

      Anyways, what does that have to do with homosexuality in TV and films?  Well, I'll get to that now.  If you look back upon history, as one person in this thread touched upon lightly, it's true that many used to believe that homosexuality was merely a choice, or as some would call a sexual perversion.  However, as we've evolved scientifically, we've barely discovered that people are actually just born gay.  With that knowledge and the fact that even though gay people always existed, for the longest time it was still too taboo for people to come out of the closet.  Then Ellen DeGenres showed up with her show, and she came out publicly saying she was gay.  Personally, I didn't see it as a big deal at the time but as I got older, I began to realize the ramifications of her actions.  Before she came out, most actors/actresses would never openly confess their sexuality like that, as most of them didn't want to risk their careers.  However, when Ellen did it, it was like it somehow sparked a rebellion for closet homosexuals to come out as well.  And since then, you'll notice more and more people are coming out as a result of it.  Don't get me wrong, I'm sure other factors played a part too, but she was the symbol that started it, as it grew over time.

      Now, Hollywood sees this whole gay agenda as part of culture, and sees how young people are becoming more comfortable within their perspective sexualities.  Therefore, you see Hollywood trying to implement pro homosexuality now, as it's their way of appealing to their target audience.  Hell even in movies where there are no homosexuals like "X-Men:  The Last Stand", you can easily find a reference to homosexuality in the line where Iceman's mom says, "Have you ever tried not being a mutant?"  You know, kind of similar to how a real life parent would say, "Have you ever tried not being gay?"  Get it?  The point is that Hollywood is a business, and they're going to do what they feel is best to market a product.  If that means implementing subliminal messages that it's okay for people to be gay, then they're going to do it.  It's about making money, and you would probably do the same thing if you were in their shoes.  Don't deny it either, as we both know how the entertainment industry works.

      Secondly, I wasn't aware that gay people in society were openly accepted, as that's news to me, and I live in the United States too.  When did that happen?  As I can name a lot of things that would contradict your belief that society in the USA has openly embraced gay people.  For one, why are gay marriages still unrecognized in some states?  If logic dictates if what you're saying is true, then wouldn't gay marriage be legal in all states and not just the more liberal ones?  Plus, why are teachers and boyscout leaders fired for coming out of the closet?  I remember seeing a episode on 60 minutes where a boyscout troop leader was fired just because he said he was openly gay, as parents didn't want to risk the possible influence on their children; while some feared worse.  Personally, I don't see what the deal is, as the episode even showed that the guy grew up in a straight family, and never even met a gay person until he found out himself that he was gay.  Therefore, you can't argue saying it was influence.  As for their other fears of this man having urges towards their kids, my only argument to them would be that there's been a lot of documented cases where some straight men and women have been prone to pedolophilia every bit as much as some gays, so that negates the argument.

      Look, I think in the end, you're breathing too much into this. If you truly want to understand how the entertainment industry works, then you need to embrace the concept that films were derived from change.  Meaning that the way films are made are always going to evolve to reflect society in some way.  If you go back to watch older films, then of course you won't see a lot of gay people or references, as it wasn't as tolerated back then.  Whereas now, films are more evolved to reflect how society is beginning to become more socially acceptable to a lot of things, and we just have to accept it.  If you can't see that, then perhaps you need to brush up on your knowledge of film history.

      1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
        tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        When I say that this may be a 'fad' I am also speaking of the monetary aspect.  Hollywood is only interested in making money, that's why we have all of these crappy remakes and sequels coming out.  They put out what has shown success and also what they think the people will want based on society.  Right now it seems like people want homosexuality in there entertainment.  I watched "Get Him To The Greek"  the other day, and out of nowhere this women pulls a dildo out of thin air and...just watch the movie you'll see the rest.  Don't even get me started on what I heard about "The Hangover III."  I didn't see it but a lot of people told me that there is a scene with transsexuals  that many parents did not know was coming.  I respect your opinion and I must clarify to you that I do not have a clear stance on this whole thing.  That's why i asked the question to see what other people think.  I am trying to figure this out.  When philosophically questing something one must look at a question from all angles Steven.  While you make some good points you leave no room for further evaluation.  You fully explained how you felt without even questing yourself as if you are absolutely correct.  To be fair and unbiased you have to question even your own answers.  I urge you to look outside of the box you are in and try and understand other points of views, with an open mind, unbiased.  If you do this and you come to the same conclusion then you have done your self a valuable service and you will be more content with the fact that you fully assessed your opinion and theory.

        And as far as gay people being accepted in society lemme tell you this:

        In the Hip Hop community being gay is  a no no, as you might know.  Recently a very prominent and respected DJ on New York's Number 1 radio station was arrested and pleaded guilty to receiving oral sex from another man.  So far he still has his job and not much back lash.  If this is not proof of acceptance, then I do not know what is.  I imagine that it will not be easy for this man in the future, but so far he is still showing up to work spinning records.  At the end of the day I do not have a problem with people living there life the way they want to.  I am just wondering if homosexuality is being used for it's shock value right now.  If so gays will be cast aside after the novelty wears off, do you understand me?

        Again try looking at a question from all angles not just yours, it will open your mind wide enough for you to discover things that were previously hard for you to see.

        1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
          Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          As was I, so what's the problem?



          Duh!  No offense, but a damn five year could've told you that.  lol


           

          This statement alone proves that either you didn't fully grasp what I was getting at, or I apparently didn't do a good enough job illustrating that was exactly my point to an extent.  Here, allow me to educate you on some film history here.  Have you ever seen a movie that came out in 1915 called, "Birth of a Nation?"  You should as it was deemed to be the first Hollywood Epic film, since you are a film student after all.  Although I doubt you'd probably like it, but it was a huge hit when it came out.  You want to know why?  Well the film promoted Klu Klux Klan glorification, racism, and portrayed black men as nothing more than neanderthals that only wanted to rape white women and over throw the government.  Do I agree or like the movie?  Hell no, as I think the director, D.W. Griffith, should've been beaten within an inch of his life for making such a horrible film.  However, do I respect it's place in film history, and accept it as simply mirroring the views of society at the time?  Why yes.  In fact, although I highly disagree with the film's obvious racist point of view, I do appreciate it's place in cinematic history so much that I still gave it a positive review on hubpages.  Does that sound like the actions of a close minded person to you?  By the way, I'm half Chinese, one quarter native american, and one quarter Hispanic, so I'm not a racist.

          You might be wonder, why am I bringing that film up?  Well I'm going to get into that now.  If you go back and research film history like you should (as you are a film student), then you'd understand that all films throughout history have mirrored the views of society at some point or another.  Back in 1915, majority of society viewed minorities as inferior, and enjoyed films that condemned them like "Birth of a Nation."  As I said before, I don't agree with it, but that was just a reflection of what society in general thought back then. 

          Fast forward to 1983, where there was a unique story in the "Twilight Zone Movie" that portrayed those same Klans men as villainous monsters to teach some white biggot a lesson.  You see a difference in portrayal?  In one movie, you can tell the Klan was being promoted as heroes, while the other showed them as villains.  This is to show how society evolved over time.  Back then, people were extremely racist, and it reflected in "Birth of a Nation."  However, fast forward years later, and you plainly see that society no longer deems them heroes.  No but rather the cold hearted villains they actually were back then, and still are since I know they still exist. 

          The point is that movies always have some reflection of modern society.  If you highly don't agree with it, then don't watch.  By the way, you make it sound like all films and shows have homo erotic humor, when in reality that's glaringly wrong.  As I can cite at least 10 or twenty that don't.  I'm just saying.



          Well it sounds like to me you're not secure enough in your own masculinity then.  I watch movies all the time too, and saw "The Hangover Part II", and it didn't bother me at all.  No, I just laughed throughout most of the movie.  Don't get me wrong like you, I prefer the company of women...REAL women, but seeing a joke about a guy getting drunk to where he has sex with a transexual doesn't bother me because of two things.  One, it's just a damn movie, and you should never associate reality with films.  Two, they never show you the scene where the transexual has sex with Ed Helms; unless you count the suggestive photo during the credits at the end.  No, with the way the movie has it set up, it's more implied than anything else; which I'm fine with.  Now if they had taken it up to "Bruno" type levels where they actually showed the man on man sex scene, then I'd definitely would agree with you there.  Sure, I'm confident in my own masculinity (unlike yourself as it seems), but even I have my own limits.  lollol



          You obviously don't know me very well, and I can tell you never read any of my reviews.  For one, I always try to look at things from all angles.  Sure, I'll be the first to admit that I'm not always right in every assessment that I have, but who is?  After all, to error is human, as they always say. 

          Another thing your failing to notice is that whenever you analyze a film, you have to look at the intent of the director and writer.  Once you acknowledge and recognize the intent, then you can assess if whether or not said intent is carried out.  Another thing to keep in mind when you analyze a film, you have to try to look at things from your target audiences' perspective.  Although you are right, I haven't read any of your work but if you do analyze films on here or for your classes, then I can obviously tell you base them off your own point of view rather than trying to see if the film carries out the intent of the director and writer.  Then again, I don't know if that's how they teach you to review movies in film school, but it's always helped me. 



          And you don't think your assessments aren't biased?  I question things all the time; which is why I always factor in target audiences perspective into all my reviews. To where, I always try to analyze a film from a fans perspective and a non fans point of view, so I know what to look for.  Look, you seem like a nice guy, so I don't want to insult you or anything.  However, I can obviously tell from our brief conversations that you only follow mainstream movies and shows right?  Have you ever tried watching a lot of independent movies?  I doubt you have, as it seems like you automatically anoint a film to be bad if it presents even one concept that you don't like.  Granted, I could be wrong about that, but your posts certainly suggest as much.

          Take for instance the film, "Happyness."  Have you heard of it?  It's a independent film that featured a guy that was a pedophile.  Granted, I like most people think all pedophiles are degenerative scum bags, but I still liked the movie because it was well written and remarkably very witty.  You get the point?  Unlike yourself, I at least am able to put aside my moral and ethical standards to at least try to enjoy a movie for what it is. You on the other hand clearly don't.



          First of all, that's only one state and one isolated incident.  Plus, you have to keep in mind we don't know what kind of contract he might have with the record studio that allows him to keep his job.  Another thing you fail to consider is that maybe the real reason they're not firing him is because it would fall under discrimination that would allow him to sue said station if they did fire him.  Another thing you have to consider is how do we know his callers aren't pre-screened?  A radio station could do that if they wanted to in order to make it SEEM like there's no backlash.  Get the point? 

          Besides, you still haven't answered my question.  If being gay is so openly accepted, then why is gay marriage not legal in all the states?  Seriously if what you're saying is true, then I'd imagine that gay marriage would be legal, right? 

          Why is it when a lesbian couple decides to have a baby through artificial insemination (not sure if that's how you spell it), and only the birth mother is written as the parent of the child?  Why is the other mother forced to merely adopt the baby?  In a fair society that you claim we have, then wouldn't it stand to reason that BOTH mothers would be listed as the child's parents; without the need for the non birth mom to adopt?


          Agreed. 


          Possibly.  Then again as I said earlier, you can say the exact same thing about the pro anti establishment themes that were pushed during the 60's and early 70's era of films too, but it's still a reflection of society's views in one form or another.

          I doubt it.


          I am, but I doubt seriously that you are.  From this conversation, it sounds like you're mainly basing your conclusions off your own point of view rather than looking at things from all angles.  For someone who claims to analyze films, it surprises me you don't see what I'm talking about.  Then again, to each their own, as I respect your opinion.  As I said earlier, I don't know how they teach you to review movies, as I mainly had to teach myself how to (Of course tailoring my style after Peter Travers and Roger Ebert helped quite a bit, as well as improving on their weaknesses as well), but I can tell you this. 
             
          From this conversation, I can obviously tell you that you don't know how to keep an open mind when it comes to watching a movie.  You even admitted that if a film contains aspects you don't agree with that you'll automatically denounce it.  Perhaps you should look in the mirror and ask yourself the same questions you're asking me, as it sounds like you need to think outside the box my friend.

          1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
            tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Wow, you did not get my point and some how (I can understand how) you are under the impression that I was attacking you.  Based on your post I had an opinion that you did not understand the point as you still do not.  My assumption of the reason why you could not understand my point is derived from the things you said.  For example:

            You said: "Look, I think in the end, you're breathing too much into this. If you truly want to understand how the entertainment industry works, then you need to embrace the concept that films were derived from change.  Meaning that the way films are made are always going to evolve to reflect society in some way.  If you go back to watch older films, then of course you won't see a lot of gay people or references, as it wasn't as tolerated back then.  Whereas now, films are more evolved to reflect how society is beginning to become more socially acceptable to a lot of things, and we just have to accept it.  If you can't see that, then perhaps you need to brush up on your knowledge of film history."

            I got your point, but somehow after reading my original post and the others you still do not get mine.  Let me explain, again.


            you said: "The point is that movies always have some reflection of modern society."   

            I agree with this.  Anyone who studies films beyond watching them for entertainment purposes knows this.  I actually agree with most of what you are saying and although I am a little offended by your attempt to question my masculinity, I am comfortable enough with who am I am to not follow that up.  I can understand your defensive attitude, but you should not have one.  I will attempt to put this as simple as possible.

            That long essay you wrote can all be neatly packaged into one statement you made,

            "The point is that movies always have some reflection of modern society."

            Though I saw what you said about carrying on sometimes to prove your point, that's all you had to say.  I am capable of reading an essay and explaining the main idea, and guess what?  Surprise surprise, I do not dis agree.  All I am trying to get you to question is if this age old blueprint that Hollywood has to display the "signs of the time", is being overused and if so might it have an effect on our society.  I am sure the movie that you mentioned "Birth of a Nation?" inspired many racists that may still be alive today.  Entertainment is powerful, I know that you know this.  All I am doing is questioning what kind of effect the over saturation of homosexuality will have on our society thats it.  No need for name calling, questioning my manhood, or attacking my schooling.  I am not attacking you, am I just asking you a question.  If you get my point now and your willing to let the forcefield down I can further explain what I mean, or if you have questions about statements I made that you don't understand I am happy to answer.

            1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
              Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I understood your point perfectly.  I was respectively disagreeing with you.

              okay

                Thanks.  I'm glad we can agree on something then.


              I wasn't questioning your masculinity, as i was merely making an observation.  I do apologize if it came out that way, as most men that do have the same issues that you have often do feel that their masculinity is threatened in some way.  I do apologize if I'm mistaken in this particular case, as it was a generalized observation based on what your conclusions were on this topic.  Believe me, it was not meant to be a personal attack. 


              Defensive?  lol  theRedpill, I don't get offended that easily, as I can assure you that i've been perfectly calm during this entire conversation.  Therefore, you obviously must've read anger into my post where there clearly wasn't any.  Look, outside of a couple of incidences in forums, I never get mad during debates here, as I feel everyone is entitled to their own opinions.  Trust me, if I was getting defensive, then you'd know for sure, as I wouldn't be too shy to curse you out in forums.   


              Interesting analogy, as you might be onto something there. 


              I wasn't attacking you personally.  I do apologize if it came across that way. 


              I know you're not, as I never thought you did.  However, I thought this was a open debate.

              1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
                tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                It definitely is an open debate, and I as well have no problem cursing someone out in a forum (although, I am new and try to show some respect for the rules).  So...look, I see you are really into movies and have knowledge of film history.  I challenge you to find 10 (R-rated) comedies that have come out within the last 2 years that do not contain a homo-erotic scene.  If not then we can assume that I am correct in my theory that Hollywood is using the popularity and shock value of homosexuality to fatten their wallets, with no care in the world for how it effects gay or straight people?  Agreed?

                1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
                  Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Agreed. I'll accept your little challenge, but it may take sometime, as I'll have to do a bit of research into all the r rated comedies released within the last two years.  And if I can't find at least 10, then I'll gladly post back on here conceding to your point of view.  smile

                  1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
                    tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Agreed

    5. Special Kay profile image60
      Special Kayposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I totally understand where you are coming from. Just this past Sunday I was watching Game of Thrones on HBO and there was a scene with a young boy of 12 and an older woman, talking about the gods and stuff, then mid way in the scene a man showed up NUDE and full frontal. Totally caught off guard and til this day I don't understand the relevance of that scene. There are moments all over television that are suggesting being Gay is OK. I truly am for sexual equality, freedom of choice, but it shouldn't have to be thrown in my face constantly.

  2. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

    Yes it does and I am sick of it!

    From the 'Backstreet Boys' to the Teletubbies to the election of known homosexual union head/actor Ronald Reagan to the office of president, Hollywood has shoved gayness down our throats(excuse the intended play of words).

    I've watched so much gayness on TV, I have it coming out of my ears... and let me tell you, it has greatly impacted my hearing!

    I long for simpler times when such abominations were not tolerated!  Never during the Colonial days did a founder father fondle another founding father (say that 5 times fast).  Could anyone see Thomas Jefferson leave his black slave's bed chamber just to give Ben Franklin a quick john hancock? Of course not! 

    Oh sure, from time to time my mind might wander when the young summer student football star comes to clean out our pool... but it is one thing if that kinda stuff is going on in someone's backyard (again, excuse the play on words), and quite another while it is on display on my TV (accept, of course, when I am watching Fox News, in which case I should expect to be screwed).

  3. 0
    Muldanianmanposted 5 years ago

    I don't know what TV or films you have been watching, but in the UK, there is hardly any representation of gay people anywhere.  In TV soaps, such as Eastenders, there is one gay couple and about 20 straight couples.  In Coronation Street, there is one gay guy out of about 50 characters.  As gay people make up about 10% of the population, it is only natural that any show or film should reflect reality.  The fact that there was no representation of gay people years ago, is because of the discrimination that was obvious then.  It is a step in the right direction that all of society should be reflected in the media.

    Years ago there was little representation of black people in the movies, and the few that were represented were usually  servants in some Southern mansion.  I hope you would agree that the fact that black actors now have starring roles is acceptable.

    If equality is to be reached for everyone in society, no matter what their sexuality, gender, race or religion, then this has to be reflected on the big and small screen.

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      okay my man lemme be clear, I live in The United States of America...The superpower of the entire world.  My experiences are based on what I have seen in this country and this country alone.  Roger that?

      1. 0
        Muldanianmanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Oh my God!  It seems we have another bigot here.  Please excuse my English inferiority compared to your obvious American superiority.  We little people across the pond are not to be allowed to respond to someone who believes he rules the world.  As the Internet is international, I think you will find that you may have to communicate with some inferior Europeans. I also wasn't aware that when you asked your question, that only people who agree with you 100% were allowed to respond.  Please excuse my ignorance in not realising this. I think your response shows to the whole world what a bigot you are and the real reason behind your question.  Thank God not all Americans are like you.

        1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
          tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          LOL, Muldanianman I like your sense of humor.  Please excuse my American defense mechanism that goes into affect when someone suggests that there country is some how better:

          You said:  don't know what TV or films you have been watching, but in the UK, there is hardly any representation of gay people anywhere.

          The way that is stated is very suggestive.  I admitted my fault, the question is, will you admit yours?

          1. 0
            Muldanianmanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I have read and re-read my first comment several times, and nowhere can I see any suggestion made by me that the UK is somehow superior to the US.  I would admit to my fault if I could see one.  I think you have interpreted the fact that I said that in the UK there is little representation of gay characters in films or on TV as a suggestion that this displays some sort of superiority on the part of the UK.  This was in fact meant to indicate quite the opposite.  I applaud the fact that there is more representation of gay characters in American media than in the UK.  The funniest film I have ever seen was an American film called the Birdcage.  I howl with laughter every time I see it.  And the funniest TV comedy show I have ever seen is Will and Grace, of which I have the entire series on DVD.  Please let's have more of this.  We need more Karens and Jacks on our screens.

            1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
              tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I understand now, thank you for clearing that up.  Hey, if you want to see more gay shows on tv come to the good ol US of A.  We have lots of them.  We even show guys kissing, penises, women fingering each other, and...ironically I don't think this site is going to allow me to even MENTION, what else is shown on American TV.  Do you get HBO and SHOWTIME over there?

      2. Stevennix2001 profile image83
        Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I hate to break it to you, but America isn't the main super power of the world at the rate we're going.  If anything since the George W. Bush administration, we've barely been trying to regain back any feasible credibility.  Not an easy feat to do considering how divided our own country is.

        1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
          tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Good point Stevennix, trust me if there's anyone who knows were going down it's me.  You must not have read any of my hubs.  I am just using the phrase while I can.  smile

          It's like a team being able to say they are NBA champions until they are beat out of the playoffs.  Get me?

      3. Eaglekiwi profile image73
        Eaglekiwiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        lol

        Ahem sorry ,but ya made me laugh with that very strong reaction.

        I did not scroll and read every single post ,but I liked you question.
        It would also appear your observations are on target.

        I originate from a much smaller country than the U.S ,however per capita the 'Gay Nation' seem to be heavily represented in all the arts ,even within the halls of Parliament.

        It has a lot to do with being 'politically correct' IMO ,and we all know that just means ,so we can operate in business without prejudice or bias-blah blah blah ,lol.

        In general the world system says 'All men( even ex men) and women are equal and I guess if TV reflects society and our communities one in every four of us must be homosexual.  ;/

        Good luck with your studies smile

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Luck? Try the word Miracle. lol lol

          1. Eaglekiwi profile image73
            Eaglekiwiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Whatever floats ya boat Cags lol

            I just want him to be happy in HIS choices.

        2. tHErEDpILL profile image87
          tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          lol wow 1 in every four...am I an endangered species?  Cool, more women for me! big_smile

  4. livelonger profile image88
    livelongerposted 5 years ago

    The responses here point to what's going on: older people are freaked out by gay people being open about who they are, and younger people don't understand what the big deal is.

    It was only in the early 70s that science began to recognize that homosexuality was not a moral perversion, but a natural variant for a minority (about 5%) of the population. Gay people who had kept their true sexuality hidden have been able to come clean about who they are. The struggle that older people, who were raised to express disgust at gay people, are dealing with is why homosexuality is so often discussed and represented in the media. It's a relatively new topic.

    Like racism, opposition to interracial marriage and women's suffrage, and other forms of ignorant bigotry that have been confronted and popularly opposed, homophobia seems to be on its way out, too.

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I hear your point but, are the 'younger people' that your talking about turning to homosexuality because of its popularity?  It could just be like any other fad that a young person would participate in just to be part of the 'cool kids.'  The problem with this is the fact that choosing to live this lifestyle without fully understanding it can result in a life that many people can not handle.  In a nutshell what I am saying is, some people know they are gay and others could possibly be getting influenced by it's popularity not knowing how they will feel about it later.  Think of it like a tattoo.  Sure everyone thinks its cool now but what about 20 years from now when your old, wrinkled and the fad is no longer in style.  How are you going to feel?

      1. livelonger profile image88
        livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Not "turning to" homosexuality, but accepting it. You can not change your sexual orientation, period.

        You're just seeing that some young people are comfortable enough about their sexuality to be honest about it. Maybe when you were younger, gay people just hid it.

        And, sorry, being gay is still not "cool" anywhere; it may be accepted, but people don't pretend to be gay to be cool.

        1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
          tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Do you deny that fads and pop culture influences young people?  There are many people who to this day regret things that they have done simply because in was 'in.'  Is it logical for you to believe that there are not some kids out there just confused and doing what they think is the cool thing to do.  Some may even be starving for attention.  This may be there 'cutting their hair low' or 'buying a red sports car.'   Don't simply be offended and answer on defense, read my question think about it rationally and then answer.  I am not a bigot, I am a rational person who can admit when he is wrong, but only if someone proves their case, I expect the same in return.  Otherwise a discussion is pointless due to bias.

          1. livelonger profile image88
            livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            No, I don't doubt that, but being gay is still not "cool." There is no widespread phenomenon of straight people trying to be gay because it's the "in" thing. Sexuality is impossible to change.

            I think you're confusing acceptance with a desire for mimicry.

            1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
              tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              "I think you're confusing acceptance with a desire for mimicry."

              One can influence the other. wink

              And now that you have agreed with logic, I can continue to discuss this with you, for you have shown that you are not an idiot.

  5. Cagsil profile image60
    Cagsilposted 5 years ago

    Does Hollywood and the music industry have a gay agenda? No.

    The only "gay" agenda is in the minds of the bigots who are religious and do not know their place in this world.

    It points to the fact that the religious cannot seem to grasp the concept of individuality and a person's individual right to do what they want with their own life. The religious folks in America continues to push their pathetic beliefs on other people's life, which is why so much damage is being done.

    The religious folks claim to have a personal relationship with a god, but fail to keep that relationship personal. That's really the only problem.

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Cagsil, I understand your point but, are gays forcing there beliefs on us just as the religious people do? 

      Logical answer here Cagsil, don't disappoint me with bias or ego.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Nope. Those who are gay just want to be left alone, so they can live their life in peace and however they choose, which is their individual right to do.

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Hey theredpill,

          What? You didn't like my logical statement, which you cannot dispute in any manner whatsoever. I noticed you've replied to every other poster who has posted since you requested me to answer you logically, but have failed in responding to my answer.

          1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
            tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I was busy, nothing more.

            Now lemme get this straight, the way you statement is constructed makes it seem as if you think gays want to hide out or "be left alone' as you put, but on the contrary all I see is the opposite.  From what I see in  media, entertainment, music, and in public most gay people usually seem pretty flamboyant and attract a lot of much wanted attention.  It seems like they want the exact opposite of what you think.  They want to be heard and seen, they want people to know they exist and that they are a huge part of our society.  Damn, did you seriously think you had a point here my friend?  Below is the definition of gay as it was used before it was picked to represent homosexuals.

            Gay-  It was originally used to refer to feelings of being "carefree", "happy", or "bright and showy"; it had also come to acquire some connotations of "immorality" as early as 1637.

            You make it too easy some times Cag wink   Just agree with me when I am making sense and look for accurate ways to oppose me.  It will make your disagreements more credible.

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You would see something that doesn't actually exist. I guess that goes along with your religious view too.

              Left alone? Doesn't mean that they want to hide and to think that is completely foolish. Left alone, means that they do not want other people invading their right to life and right to choice. But, then again, with your religious view, that's nothing something you've ever learned how to do. Stay out of their life and let them live how they choose to do. It's their right and not your right to infringe upon that right.

              If you're unfamiliar with what a "Right" is? Then I suggest you read my "Controversial- Rights vs Morals" Hub. It might just give you a clue.
              Wanted attention? You must be joking. The attention they receive isn't wanted in any manner. It's completely opposite. They just want to be left alone, so that they do not have to defend their own right to live(Life) and right to choose.
              Untrue.
              Of course they want to be heard, up to the point that they are actually EQUAL to everyone else. When that is actually done, then they would have no real issue.
              It's obvious that you NEVER have a point to be made, except to voice your own religious BS view.

              1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
                tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                What religious view do I have that invades a persons right to life and choice?
                I have a belief that God exists unless otherwise proven wrong.  I don't go to church, or read the bible.  I don't preach and try to make people agree with the fact that I think there is a God...what the hell are you talking about?  I can not prove a point to a person like you.  A person who is unable to understand what another person is saying if they disagree with you.  I have no idea where you get the fact that a have a "religious BS view."  I don't even know if I am right about God being real it just logically makes sense to me.  That's it.  You make it seem like I am a paster or preacher trying to convert the world into religion.  I swear I am starting to believe that you have no brain at all, seriously.  Having a discussion with you is like having a conversation with Sarah Palin.  You never make any sense and your only weapon against opposition to your point of view is nonsense that you  make up based on misconstrued points that people try to make to you.  You need help.

                1. Cagsil profile image60
                  Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  This singular belief is one of "do as I say, not as I do", all by itself. What part do you not understand about the belief itself?
                  Then how did you come to the belief in a "God"? The word "God" was put into all religions. You certainly didn't come to the conclusion on your own. It must have been given to you at some point.
                  I just explained above.
                  A person like me? You're too funny. Talk about willful ignorance.
                  I have no problem with people who disagree. I have a problem with people who cannot see beyond themselves. And, do not try to turn it around on me, because I wrote a hub on "The Human Ego and How To See Past It", and if I couldn't see past my own ego, then I wouldn't have been able to write the hub.
                  All religious views are BS. Easy enough to understand. Even someone with limited intelligence would get it.
                  Apparently, you don't understand Logic.
                  Oh really. Maybe you should read the words I type, instead of only reading the ones that you are able to interpret through your skewed perception.
                  Your attempt at insulting me isn't a surprise. Try a little comprehension. It might actually work.

                  1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
                    tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    You most likely wrote that hub about ego due to the subconscious worries that you have about your own ego( a Freudian slip in other words).  I guess until you can check your ego at the door and actually allow yourself to understand other peoples points of points of views instead of automatically denouncing them, we will agree to disagree.

    2. Eaglekiwi profile image73
      Eaglekiwiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Youv'e confused the word  'personal' with the word 'private' in the instance you refer too Cags wink

      I really love fresh coffee-personal statement.

      I really love talking about Jesus -personal statement.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Actually EK, rights are not private.

  6. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

    The media, Hollywood, etc. has to get back to old fashioned heterosexual conservative family values.. like those championed by the Royals, for example...

    http://www.estergoldberg.com/.a/6a0105349ca980970c014e8827f511970d-500wi

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      lol lol lol lol Good show Greek One, good show!!!

    2. 0
      Muldanianmanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I think she was practising her curtsey.

    3. I am DB Cooper profile image67
      I am DB Cooperposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Gotta love the "see no evil" and "hear no evil" expressions from the little kids.

      1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
        tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Great observation, this is a classic photo.

  7. optimus grimlock profile image61
    optimus grimlockposted 5 years ago

    this is just gaaaaay, thats all smile

  8. Disturbia profile image60
    Disturbiaposted 5 years ago

    tHErEDpILL, Hollywood and the music industry have only one adjenda, to make money.  They will exploit whatever group or cause they need to in order to achive that goal. Gays just happen to be the flavor of the month.

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Disturbia I am glad you said that.  If you look at my original question that is part of it...'or is it just the new fad.'  Check it out at the top.  I am starting to lean in this direction of this being an answer to my question, but it is too soon to conclude.  I still need more opinions and research.  Confirming this as the answer will not be fair, I have to question my own answers to be concise.

  9. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

    Human rights is total a faddish trend.  Just like the new-fangled motorized vehicle that keeps scaring my mule.

  10. 68
    logic,commonsenseposted 5 years ago

    Hell they hire each other mostly because the majority in Hollywood are gay, so it's an incestous relationship all the way around.
    Who cares though?  Like anyone with any intelligence cares what comes out of that rathole anyway.  Doesn't matter if they are gay or not, like Disturbia says, it's all about the money and the rest is just icing on the cake for them.

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I care and you do logic.  We both care because it is a part of our society and we have an opinion on it.  Otherwise you would not be in here posting a response to this question. 

      Common sense...you care, or you would not be in here. smile

  11. Eaglekiwi profile image73
    Eaglekiwiposted 5 years ago

    Hollywood has always been 'Macho land' so after male dominance(early 50's/60's) ,I guess the most logical jump (pardon the pun) would be anything t do with Sex.....

    1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
      tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Cowboy stories were very big back then, and supposedly there was a lot of "Brokeback Mountains" out there.  If this is true, then it means that Hollywood has always been a homosexual paradise.  The fact that is accepted now gives them the opportunity to stop hiding and come out (pun  intended).  I just wonder if they are getting a little too drunk on power.  It is bad for any group to be drunk on power, whether gay, straight, religious, etc.

  12. tHErEDpILL profile image87
    tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago

    I won the HubNuggets contest! Thanks to everyone who voted for me.  Maybe now I can get some more respect around here.  lol

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Winning the contest doesn't actually prove anything nor will it gain you any respect. lol

      Just like Hubscore and Authorscore. It's meaningless.


      Edit: You lied. You didn't win anything. You came in second. Thus, you didn't win. lol

      1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
        tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        It was a joke Cag, I wouldn't expect you to get that.  Anyway seems like you stumbled upon the punchline while trying to hate on me, so please laugh it up.  It was my original intention...as I said it was a joke...hence the lol

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Statements made always need clarification. Regardless whether or not, a smiley is attached. DUH!

          1. tHErEDpILL profile image87
            tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            ...and somehow you attempt to explain your statements yet they are still not understood.  Maybe cause THEY DON"T  MAKE SENSE!

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Actually, it's YOU. Yet, don't realize it. Not a surprise. I have plenty of followers who read what I do write and have no issue with it. Therefore, you're proven wrong hundreds of times over.

              But, nice try.

  13. tHErEDpILL profile image87
    tHErEDpILLposted 5 years ago

    or we could continue here.

Closed to reply
 
working