Hee, I just got the following comment left - by "anonymous," of course - on my "Bring On the Gay Villains" post from last week:
"If you see a gay character in 3:10 TO YUMA, your genetic sexual disease has moved so deep into your perceptions that you see fags in everything and everyone. You see, there is a non-sexual component to heterosexual men, something that you are far too sexually deranged to consider. Frodo didn't want to shag Sam, Butch didn't crave Sundance's butthole, and Watson was genuinely just a friend to Holmes. Not everything is about analingus, barebacking, and anal fisting; get yourself to a therapist, and you might be able to see homosexuality for what it is; at best a genetic malfunction, at worst, a butthole obsessed perversion that sees itself in every innocent relationship between normal men."
I guess "anonymous" will be in for a rude awakening when Peter Jackson releases his extended-extended edition of Lord of the Rings in which the scenes of Frodo fisting Sam are (ahem) re-inserted.And so much use of the word "butthole." I've never heard the word "butthole" used more times in my life. Butthole this, butthole that. Who's obsessed with buttholes again? I'm confused.
.
Posts
2 comments:
BROKEBACK MOUNTDOOM
As for the anonymous comment, what a coward. Eff that creep. (I'd say "asshole" but that might excite him.)
The really stupid thing is that you hadn't even seen the movie when you wrote that post - once you did, you thought the gay thing was a stretch.
This guy obviously has issues. The only reason he could have for caring what others think about Sam and Frodo's relationship is that they might think the same about his relationships with other men. And straight men who are comfortable with their sexuality don't care what people think about their relationships with other men. It's enough for them to know it's platonic. Those obsessed with how others see these relationships, however, are likely closet cases (no surprise there!)
Post a Comment