I’m confused over how anyone could think Ellen DeGeneres could turn anybody on to anything.
Marc
Oh man…that Spiderman thing was classic! BWAHAHAHAH!!!
I wonder if these folks read the King James Bible-and if so, if they realize they’re reading a book authored by a bisexual!
[sarcasm continues] And married women shouldn’t work on the film, either, because married women belong at home, taking care of the house and the children and baking bread. Obviously Jews shouldn’t work on the film, because we know they don’t have good Christian values! So, all you heterosexual Christian males better learn to work on movies damned quick, else there won’t be anything left fit to take our kids to!![/sarcasm continues]
Will be taking my girls, including my 3 year old to see it Wednesday. Or, at least I was, until this link pointed out the dangers involved!:rolleyes:
Can I be a bit nitpicky here? James I(James VI of Scotland) did not “author” the translation of the Bible that carries his name. As I’m sure you know Guin, teams of scholars did the translating. They weren’t the authors either. Jimmy Stuart just lent his name and imprimatur to the whole endeavor!
Oh goodness me! I am about to leave this very minute and take my darling, impressionable Hawklette and her very best girlfriend to see this movie!! Good thing I found out before I made this terrible mistake!!! Perhaps it is already too late!!!
I’ll let ya know if we like it.
(C’mon, Guin, sponsored by, not authored by. You know that.)
A technique he apparently likes, judging from the next full paragraph down:
:rolleyes:
Actually, I didn’t know that. Thank you for correcting me.
Some of the reviews though, by individuals are pretty good. Like the ones for Boys Don’t Cry-most of them said it was a good, yet very sad and tragic film.
Because you know, the Christian Right is all about treating homosexuals fairly - you know, love the sinner, hate the sin, right?
Oh, except we can’t give them jobs (even if they’re famous and funny and right for the role we give them), because then they’re just promoting their lifestyle.
Yeah, that’s fair. No jobs, but, you know, they just love them anyway, right?
And now, I’m going to go throw up.
Esprix
Gandalf the gay?
Cue mental image of a bouncing, flamingly gay Gandalf…
That’s why they gave him that particular ring, then…
The complexities of that story keep confounding me.
“Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they’re as subtle as Kenneth Anger.”
Sorry.
Then he would be Gandalf the FAB-U-LOUUUS! Though did you notice the tension between him and Saruman? And that both “men” carry “long wooden poles” and “wave them around to work their ‘power’”? Hmm?
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand. Unless you think the proportions of taxes paid by various demographic groups is somehow related to sexual orientation of actors? I didn’t think so. That the website happens to host an article about taxation that contains what you or others believe to be severely weak arguments doesn’t reflect at all on the strength of an argument presented by another author that happens to appear on the same website. That makes it a non sequitur.
The weaknesses in the argument at hand, which I and others have pointed out, are to be evaluated independant of their source. To be discussed, an argument must be divorced from it’s author. And it certainly should not carry the burden of being attacked because other arguments made by people who share the same publisher are deemed to be weak. That’s a crappy argument, and it deserves the full force of my derision. Because this is the Pit and not GD, such a total non sequitur is allowable and occasionally fun, but don’t pretend it’s anything more than that.
I’m disappointed in all of you. I opened this thread hoping to find a clever pun on “queer fish,” and it’s not here.
Maybe you have better taste than me. Shame on you.
Perhaps this movie will give us a new term, Nemosexual: someone whose orientation is set by cartoon characters.
(Of course I sort of had the hots for Jessica Rabbit, but never mind.)
But anyway, what I really wanted to share is the type of fish that Ellen DeGeneres provides the voice for in this film.
It’s a blue tang.
(heh heh. He said “blue tang.”)
This had to result from some sort of misunderstanding. Someone thought the studio executives said, “What this movie really needs is a little lesbian blue tang.”
Are you being deliberately obtuse, RexDart? Both articles are clearly arguing from an anti-gay position. Do you think that the following’s inclusion as a coda to the article on the “Burden of Marriage” is totally insignificant, too?
Why ever would we imagine that there is a common theme running through both articles? Of course, you’re right. Suggesting that people should be discriminated against by employers based on their sexual orientation is completely different from suggesting that people should be discriminated against by government based on their sexual orientation.
What was I thinking?
Damn, that “sarcasm” business is really catching. Almost as bad as that homosexuality that’s been going around.
Nope, no agenda at Crosswalks.com:
Whatya mean, ‘insert something ironic?’
You’re way outta line, mister!
I could go on, but somehow, it’s just a little bit too depressing.
On a lighter note, Satisfying Andy Licious, I think it’s really funny that they made Ellen’s character into a Blue Tang-- it really demonstrates how much of a commitee-project the script was.
Let’s see, we’ve got a fish with no short-term memory, named Dory. Hmmmm… What kind of fish do you think she was when she was first conceived?
(Ani seems like an appropriate cite for the goldfish-have-no-memory urban legend in the context of this thread…) Sounds to me like Dory was a Poisson d’Or before a none-too-bright art department decided she needed to look more exotic. :smack:
Yyyyyah. “Yes, my name is Iam Punha, and I’m running for office as a homosexual. If elected, I plan to go bi, and if relected I may become polyamorous.”
These guys really need to work on their writing abilities. If they’re going to write, they ought to have some.
Wait a minute! They say Jesus was a fisher of men, and all those Jesus people have fish on their car. If fish make you gay, then…
Jesus was gay!
Nevermind that, what were all those gay men doing in that net?!