web
counter
 

How a Hollywood Movie Is Turning All Our Children Gay

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (44)



8f66d5a57fb05289_the-kids-are-all-right.jpg

You’re going to want to read this very insightful post from Andrea Peyser, over at the NY Post. It’s about how that dastardly Hollywood is trying to turn our children gay, and I think she hit the nail right on the head. She’s such a brilliant, open-minded egalitarian. I think I want to take her behind the middle school and impregnate her with gay babies.

She writes, in part:

Shh! Hollywood is having a teaching moment — this time in the bedroom, where, if you’re straight, chances are you’ve been doing it wrong.

In the first frames of the new flick “The Kids Are All Right,” two boys snort coke. Next, a dad tackles his teenage son so ferociously, the child can’t breathe.

That boy soon tries to relieve himself on a dog. Gross. And a man with exceptional appetites proves that Cialis, not to mention heterosexual relations, is for losers.

That is how the most self-righteously moralistic movie to hit the big screen since “Forrest Gump” preaches an undeniable Hollywood truth: Men, and boys who will be men, are not just bad. They’re corrupt, amoral horndogs.

And women, especially neurotic, lesbian mommies who drive Volvos, watch gay male porn (go figure!) and get plastered before lunch, are perfect.

These are the life choices presented in Lisa Cholodenko’s “The Kids,” sort of a cross between “Leave it to Beaver” and “Kittens With Whips.” Choose your lifestyle wisely, moviegoers. For this film is set to go down in history as the first major motion picture to make a family led by gay women — A-lister Annette Bening, as the control-freak doctor Nic, “wed” to A-lister Julianne Moore, as the weepy, infantilized Jules — seem not just normal, but close to godly.

It reaches further than the gay-cowboy romp “Brokeback Mountain,” whose characters maintained a sense of otherness while shielding the kids from their shenanigans. In this movie, exposing kids is the entire point.

And this is how Hollywood does an end run around morality.

Oh, Andrea. You’re right! How dare this movie suggest that lesbian mothers might actually be ideal parents. Can you imagine?! I bet they rug munch right in front of the kids! Gross. They probably invite the kids over to help out. “Can you help Mommy with this strap-on, Eliza? I’ve only got two hands!” Yuck!

How dare anyone ever suggest that lesbian mothers might be normal. Or even better than normal. That domain is reserved for exclusively for WASPY stay-at-home Funicellos that wake up early every morning to pack a lunch for their children with wholesome Kraft processed cheese, fresh Capri-Sun, and Bible scripture.

And I totally agree with her point on Brokeback Mountain, too. I mean: That was an amoral gay-fest, but at least no kids were harmed. Just that homo Jack, and he probably deserved it for all that sinful sodomy.

Lesbian mothers! Pshaw! What will Hollywood think up next? And the audacity of a Hollywood movie to present its self-righteously moralistic viewpoints. Self-righteously moralistic viewpoints should be restricted to horrible, shrewish bitches like Andrea Peyser, where they belong. Right!?









Sam Raimi In Talks To Direct Wyatt Earp Film | Storytellers: The Black Elvis | Sam Cooke's "A Change is Gonna Come"













Comments

Ugh. I have written four diatribes but cannot sum up my feelings as aptly as "Fuck You Fucking Fucker Fucks."

Posted by: esme at July 20, 2010 11:13 AM

Obviously what she wrote is the journalistic equivalent of "trolling" but still just for saying it she needs someone to fuck start her head. Of course this is the NY Post we're talking about so this vile sensationalist opinion isn't exactly unexpected from that fine publication.

She is wrong though about one thing. I have a friend with lesbian parents and they are just as fucked up as heteros. Meaning, totally normal.

Posted by: TylerDFC at July 20, 2010 11:18 AM

I particularly enjoyed her use of the word "romp" to describe Brokeback Mountain. Yeah, because that movie was just chock-full of wacky fun gay cowboy hijinks. Stupid bitch.

Posted by: Foder at July 20, 2010 11:20 AM

Apparently Hollywood has gone so gay they've sodomized themselves back to the 50's!! Quick, get me the ghost of Allen Ginsberg!

Posted by: D-Day at July 20, 2010 11:21 AM

Now that was twattastic.

Posted by: peanut at July 20, 2010 11:25 AM

Holy shit.

This bitch is a piece of work. She just flippantly took a flamethrower to:

Gay relationships
Children of gay couples
Successful lesbians
Gay families
Parents with issues of their own, aside from their kids
Loving parents
Closeted men who refuse to live a tortured, fake life to fool their kids

Wow.

WOW!!!!

I am nearly speechless. This is so brazenly homophobic that I don't know where to begin. Who is this cunt? This can't be serious. No way this gets published in a national newspaper without it being some sort of misguided joke. Sweet Fancy Moses.

Posted by: Kballs at July 20, 2010 11:26 AM

Lesbians aren't the only ones who clean carpet with the kids in the room. Just sayin'.

I think the issue is that Hollywood is putting more openly gay couples and people on the screen. There are plenty of instances wherein they hint at a characters preference for their own team but it's far more seldom that they hold up a large, neon, blinking sign that says, "Hey, I love cock and I also have one!"

Posted by: admin at July 20, 2010 11:27 AM

Addendum: Hollywood being more open about gayness is not the issue with this moron. It's an issue. Much like everything else I suspect.

Posted by: admin at July 20, 2010 11:30 AM

I have a different point of view, I browsed over the NY Post so I could get the real flavor of what Peyser said. Hollywood is showing us the new makeup of the nuclear family, it doesn’t make Hollywood good or bad. But I guess you aren’t enlightened if you don’t like this movie. I have no intention of going to see this movie, not because this sort of thing offends me, but because it doesn’t interest me. And because that fucking Mark Ruffalo mumbles and I can’t understand a word he says.

Posted by: Pookie at July 20, 2010 11:34 AM

A-lister Annette Bening, as the control-freak doctor Nic, “wed” to A-lister Julianne Moore, as the weepy, infantilized Jules — seem not just normal, but close to godly.

25 years ago, Annette Bening going down on Julianne Moore would have been godly.

End around morality?

How about this: you raise your kids how you want to and others can raise their kids like they want to?

Posted by: Fredo at July 20, 2010 11:35 AM

It reaches further than the gay-cowboy romp “Brokeback Mountain,” whose characters maintained a sense of otherness while shielding the kids from their shenanigans.

Romp? Shenanigans? Seriously?

Posted by: Anna von Beaverdouche at July 20, 2010 11:36 AM

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I am in love with Neal Cassaday
He really makes me howl
But homophobia in the world today
It really makes me scowl!
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Posted by: The Ghost of Allen Ginsberg at July 20, 2010 11:36 AM

This is one of those things where someone writes something idiotic just to piss people off and get more traffic to the site...right? No? It's terribly written gumph, though I do like how it ends suddenly and heads into 'Swiss Cheese Justice'.

The movie concerns the kids' hunt for their "sperm donor" -- a term used in place of "biological father" to diminish guys.

Lady, I call my own father the sperm donor, I don't need a movie to give me that idea. It does take more than sperm to make a father, not that you'd probably care as long as he's straight huh? And did the character not, in fact, donate sperm? It's not like it's without merit.


Posted by: Carrie at July 20, 2010 11:37 AM

A type-A person and a hilariously emotional person make up a couple in a movie?

And they're portrayed as normal in an amusingly anecdotal way?

It's so strange... It's almost like every other movie involving a married couple with quirks and grounded by love, who are shaken by a change, but inevitably rediscover themselves in a stronger place through the ties of kinship and self-growth.

But nooooo that couldn't be possible. You can't be gay and function like an average couple. You certainly can't be happy and establish healthy relationships with your partner and children. You have to be full of ridiculously one-dimensional stereotypes, wherein you only have surface level conflicts that don't actually establish depth.

If I can't rely on overly played-out tropes in Hollywood in which people who are different from me are portrayed as caricatures, what can I trust!!?!??

Posted by: Kayanne at July 20, 2010 11:40 AM

Is it wrong that she made me want to see this movie...? Seriously, before, I wans't going to watch it!

Posted by: SarahReznor at July 20, 2010 11:41 AM

Hey Dustin, that was sneaky! I'm following all of your points, you seem to be in total agreement with Ms. Peyser's post, and you wait until the very last sentence to throw us all for a loop-

You were being sarcastic the entire time, you joker!! You didn't support her comments AT ALL, did you?

But I have to give credit where it's due, you sly fox, successfully keeping us in the dark all the way up until that big 'reveal' at the end!

Nice trick, but I'm on to you now. Don't go thinking it'll be that easy the next time, joker guy!

Posted by: Scotty at July 20, 2010 11:44 AM

OOOOOH WAIT A MINUTE!

I didn't see that this was the NY Post. Quick piece of edumacation:

The NY Post was bought my everyone's favor megalo-maniacal Ebeneezer Scrooge-Mel Gibson lovechild Rupert Murdoch in '93. It's a huge tabloid mess, running with loads of ridiculous headlines. The headlines are pretty clever, though (Michael Jackson dying hurt them; they loved "Jacko is Whacko!"), and it's a pretty quick read with about 5 pages of somewhat honest news on the front and a decent sports section in the back.

However, the entire middle of the paper is the published, personal propaganda press for the Conservative wing of New York. Every cartoon has a somewhat racist interpretation of Obama, or mocks the stimulus bill, etc.

The "editorial" pieces are borderline vulgar in their republican advocacy, and the paper loves getting onto the shitlists of local minority groups.

So I sure as hell wouldn't characterize this twatwaffle's opinion as that of a major Hollywood contributor. It's kind of like putting stock in an ostrich teaching you how to fly. True, you went to a bird, but you're only gonna end running away to keep your eyes from being pecked out.

Posted by: D-Day at July 20, 2010 11:46 AM

Sweet Fancy Moses

OMG Moses was gay?

Posted by: mswas at July 20, 2010 11:47 AM

As a native New Yorker I beg of you please, please pay no attention to this fucktwat. Seriously, she and the NY Post are just a farce. Always have been, always will be. The whole paper is a "troll" as it were. And, just like The Simpsons found when the oversized advertisements ran amok in Springfield, they will only go away if you ignore them.

Posted by: JenVegas at July 20, 2010 11:47 AM

OMG Moses was gay?

What did you think they meant by his 'years in the wilderness' hmmm?

Posted by: Carrie at July 20, 2010 11:51 AM

mswas,
Moses was whatever you wanted him to be, baby.

Posted by: Kballs at July 20, 2010 12:04 PM

I did know that Moses supposes his toeses are roses...

Posted by: mswas at July 20, 2010 12:08 PM

Damn Hollywood and your gay agenda.

I'm gonna be pretty pissed off years from now if I come to find out my first-born son is running around grabbing guys by the muscle ball because a future big-screen, Disneyfied version of Jerry Mathers has a loving relationship with his pet dragon named Jake.

Comusexual Homonists!!! The lot of you!!!!

Posted by: PissBoy at July 20, 2010 12:23 PM

Ooooh can I change my screen name to Comusexual Homonist? PLEASE?????

Posted by: Mac at July 20, 2010 12:26 PM

great comment kballs; i think i'll ignore this bitch and her vile so thanks

Posted by: splinter at July 20, 2010 12:32 PM

I imagine when she says "It reaches further than the gay-cowboy romp “Brokeback Mountain”...while shielding the kids from their shenanigans...exposing kids is the entire point" she must mean in the context of the story.

Yes! Jake Gyllenhall and Heath Ledger aren't cornholing eachother in front of their children. 1. That would just be too much for any small child to handle when the WHOLE TIME the daddies have kept up the visage of heterosexuality to everyone except eachother. 2. In their social and psychological setting for that story, hiding what they had together was their only choice.

Now, in TKAA, Annette Benning and Julianne more aren't exposing their children to anything they don't already know as everyday motherfucking life. These kids grew up with 2 moms. And just like any child with 2 moms, or 2 dads, or whatever, this is their normality. It's not shocking. They're not clapping suction cups on the living room floor for christ's sake and making the kids watch and learn. They're not turning their son into a queen or their daughter into a fucking lumberjack.

No...if there's anything that can be said of 'The Kids Are Alright' it's that the 2 moms take a HUGE fucking risk by attempting to build some modicum of a relationship with the biological father with their children. Because in their case, and in the children's case...he's the donor. Not the father. But they allow him to come into the kids' lives to take on some sort of fatherly role. He shot his load into a cup and that was it. By allowing him into their lives they take the risk of ruining their family....resentment could build in the kids because mom and mom aren't straight. it could build between the moms because "Who's this fuckin guy and why do the kids enjoy him so much? We're the parents." There's a whole gamut of emotions and thoughts that I assume aren't all dealt with in the movie. And I haven't even seen the fucking thing.

No, if anything, instead of TKAA exposing children to anything, it's exposing them to a forward-thinking couple who happens to be gay allowing their children to know everything about themselves that they possibly can. It looks more like a message about finding out who we all are inside and out and where we get "those little things that make US."

FUCK YOUR FACE Andrea Peyser! (That's a fucking gay name anyway!)

Posted by: PissBoy at July 20, 2010 12:36 PM

I know this is going to be annoying but I am compelled to point out that if one's name is Funicello, one is de facto not a WASP.

I know what you were trying to say and I agree wholeheartedly but you know, details, details! Plus I'm still pissed at you for that underhand swipe at Kirk Douglas.

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 20, 2010 1:09 PM

Posted by: Carrie at July 20, 2010 11:37 AM

Carrie, I believe the new politically correct term for anointing proper respect to a male who is not present in the child's life, but donated the biological matter for the use of creating the child, is "Baby Batter Bequeather."

Also, I love you all for gay Moses.

Posted by: Kayanne at July 20, 2010 1:12 PM

I knew someone was going to bring it up so I didn't have to, PaddyDog.

Posted by: Smokin at July 20, 2010 1:26 PM

A Murdoch-owned paper says bad shit about gay people? What a shock.

Posted by: Slash at July 20, 2010 1:45 PM

PissBoy, I want to have your babies!!!! Want to?

Posted by: Tallulahc at July 20, 2010 1:55 PM

Apologies, it was TK who dinged Kirk Douglas.

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 20, 2010 1:59 PM

The universe is a strange and confusing place. How is it that an idiot, homophobic, hack writer like this has a job when there are so many talented writers out there struggling to get by.

Oh, and Ms. Peyser, in the words of Maggie Gyllenhaal, you can go suck a fuck.

Posted by: Meghan at July 20, 2010 3:17 PM

If I understand correctly, this is the same website that employs Armond White, no?

Question answered.

Posted by: dsbs at July 20, 2010 3:26 PM

Sorry, New York Press, New York Post. Blerg.

Anyway, yeah, clearly the trolls are everywhere, and they're multiplying.

Posted by: dsbs at July 20, 2010 3:32 PM

HATE.

Posted by: Aislinn at July 20, 2010 3:44 PM

In reading the comments after that terrible article, only two of them were pro-Peyser. The rest pretty much scathed the everloving shit out of her.

And one comment was gold:

MamaP

07/15/2010 9:51 AM

Come on, Andrea. If ever given the chance, you'd hop into bed with both these ladies. Admit it.

YES.
I hope Peyser panicked that people perhaps perceive her as a pusspounder.

Posted by: melisseh at July 20, 2010 4:11 PM

Hollywood is turning our children gay? Damn, I thought it was sex education in schools. Oh wait, that's what's turning them into promiscuous pregnant teenage sex machines. I get so confused. Maybe it's the lack of prayer in school that's turning them gay? No. I suppose she's right, it's Hollywood. First the Telletubbies and Spongebob indoctrinate them and then they see this movie and POW your kids are gay.


Posted by: Smokey at July 20, 2010 4:35 PM

What a bitch. For lack of a witty comment like all the others here i just say that. Plain and simple.

Posted by: Aaliyah at July 20, 2010 8:39 PM

Every now and then, some thing like this catches me off guard and hits me so hard I feel winded. Chest-achingly, breathlessly, crying-inexplicably winded. My partner and I are recently, so very happily, married and we're now getting ready to start a family. Yup, we plan to be those smug lesbian moms bragging about their well-adjusted children. And we've all come so far, of course, and it's mostly just so easy, that I can (from a position of race and class privilege, of course, not to mention my handy Canadian citizenship) forget that crap like this gets written, and that the people who write it do so with fervent beliefs and so much machinery behind them.

And it just feels so very, very personal.

So, yeah. No incisive critique of Peyser here. Just a sad face. I think the "wolves who raised him" comment was possibly the worst. But it had some stiff competition.

I'm going to go look at pictures of puppies now.

Posted by: fajaz at July 20, 2010 9:13 PM

As a homosexual who also has plans (albeit distant ones) for marriage and children, I'm with you, fajaz.
This was so blithering in its homophobia that passes right by hate and swings back around to being pathetic.

I'm comforted by the knowledge that with a movie like TKAA coming out, this means we've reach yet another small step in our social progression and that we've reached a place in our society where such things are perceived with the same disgust and distaste reserved for other bigotries like racism or anti-Semitism.
In other words: I'm comforted by the fact that we've already left backward-thinking dinosaurs like that in the dust.

Posted by: Sassafrass Green at July 21, 2010 1:28 AM

Thanks, Sassafrass!

Posted by: fajaz at July 21, 2010 9:42 AM

I wonder what Armond White has to say.

Posted by: Maui M at July 21, 2010 1:23 PM

Why is it that straights are so afraid of someone turning them or their children gay? Is their grasp of their sexuality so fragile they can be turned. Gays are surrounded by straight influences 24/7 but none of these influences have any effect on them.

Posted by: Rick at July 24, 2010 11:53 AM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time