"Revenge of the Sith" is anti-sex and REALLY anti-gay

When I saw Revenge of the Sith, I knew that something was wrong. Certain perceptive critics, however, awakened me to the truth:

**Stephanie Zacherak of Salon.com**:

David Edelstein of Slate.com:

The lightsabers are clearly dongs. That’s so obvious one can barely call it “symbolism.” But much else in the way of homoerotic allegory lurks beneath the chipper sci-fi surface.

The Dark Side is gayness, whereas, asymettrically, the Light Side is asexuality. Lucas’s vision of sexuality is so skewed that he thinks that only celibacy can save a man from gay attractions.

The Dark Side is “quicker, more seductive,” according to Yoda (who looks himself like a flacid–hence non-threatening–peen). Palpitine (sounds like “palpitations”) is gayness personified, the Evil Queen who turns butches into bitches.

In contrast, the Jedi are without the touch of woman or man; they hang out in a temple and ponder their chastity, saving up their kundalini for a rainy day (the Force and saberschlong is never used for attack, etc.).

“I loved you like a brother! But not as a lover! Why did you come out to me?”

Anakin (“kin of anus”), however, snags Pad-poon when his nerdy colleagues are unawares. Although Lucas is against sex altogether, I’m willing to call him a homophobe because he clearly sees man-on-man love as the lowest, darkest, and most dangerous form of sexuality.

How could I have been so blind? What is it that Anakin fears the most? The death of his wife in childbirth–a not-so-subtle way of saying that even heterosexuality (i.e., “normal” sex), is scary stuff. And fear, as we know, leads to the Dark Side. Hence, normal sex is bad, but if you engage in it and it freaks you out, you’ll go gay and things will even get worse. Better leave well enough alone.

Indeed, it gets so bad for Ani (pseudo-plural of “anus”), in fact, that once he falls to the Gay Side and his advances are rejected on Mustafar (the volcanism clearly representing the hot ‘n’ bothered combo of organ, orifice, and ejaculate) by the pure and asexual Obi-Wan, he is further degraded into leather-clad gimp.

And look at Luke, too, in RotJ. He rejects the gayness of the Queen (in The Empire Strikes Back, the character was apparently played by a woman with lemur eyes superimposed–cite; which suggests that a gay man is both woman and frail animal), tossing away his lightphallus. This is entirely in character, since nowhere in the series does he ever get puss. The Queen’s reaction? Force lightning. It has often been asked why Vader doesn’t use force lightning, nor Dooku, etc. The answer is that Force lightning is pure prana sans the mediating phallus; it is, in effect, the darkest, most ying, most nelly expression of the Gay Side. One may also speculate that, by the time of RotJ, Palpatine couldn’t get it up any more, anyway.

One could go on and on, with the interpretation (if something so obvious could be called “interpretive”) above shedding much light on otherwise questionable details. Why does Palp’s face transform during the fight with Windu? Because his switch to nelly lighting requires the symbolic change of face to old and wrinkled anus.

One could go on in this vein all night long.

By the masses, for the masses. As America’s love affair with asexual fundamentalism lurches forth apace, it’s no coincidence that one of the most popular movie series reminds us to protect our modesty, think pure thoughts, and only pray to OMM in a Unichurch.

This reminds me very much of the many lengthy treatises which treat “The Lord of the Rings” as a homoerotic epic. It’s all very interesting, but it clogs my BS detectors so badly that I may have to replace them. :rolleyes:

Oh for the love of-first everyone claiming that Jar Jar was racist, now this?

Yoda doing ‘jazz hands’ swung it for me.

Seriously, these are just the ramblings of people that think everything must be about them. They almost scream DEFINE ME, DEFINE ME!

Totally different. Tolkien was obviously pro-gay, whereas Lucas is anti-gay. Tolkien’s gayness was essentially healthy and positive; Lucas is so uptight about sex that, despite his heterosexuality, he fears nothing so much as becoming a man-lover.

Thank you. One method of unclogging is, well, you know

Jar Jar was racist.

Who, who are you talking about?

Sorry, but I still think this theory is a crock of Sith.

This is easily as stupid as the “the clones represent white people’s fear of Mexican immigrants” complaint that was floating around after AotC was released.

However, Jar-Jar Binks was clearly a racist slur designed to perpetuate the hurtful stereotype that black people are amphibians with long floppy ears.

I dare you to do a google search on the “Sith Academy” and read the fan-fic submissions.

As for the OP, all I can really say is that I didn’t interpret things that way.

By the way…

Well, touting asexuality as a virtue is probably a good idea when your target audience is a bunch of rabid sci-fi geeks.

And here I thought my copy of Tne Empire Dykes Back was pirated when I heard Girth Vader say “I am your sugar daddy.”
This makes a lot more sense now.

Jar Jar was damned annoying, but there’s no reasonable argument that he’s racist.

Aw, I actually thought Sith was rather slashy. Anakin/Obi-Wan = OTP, baby. Attractive men wielding swords…

…er. I mean. Why does everyone have to be obsessed with teh gay or the lack thereof in everything?

What? Don’t stay here rubbernecking! Carry on!

Uh, he’s not Mexican.

“Huh? Well… he looks Mexican! So it’s still racist!”

… … … … :eek:

Hey, at least there were boys with close relationships in that. It’s a heck of a lot more plausible than this.

Virtually all the points suggested by the OP - aside from the silly Freudianism of looking at lightsabres as dicks - presuppose that being gay is bad. It’s a kind of circular reasoning: “Palpatine is bad. The Jedi hate him. He’s secretly gay, therefore the Jedi hate gay people. QED.” Seriously, examine each point, Aeschines, and you’ll see that they all depend on one bringing in the assumption that being gay is bad and references to evil being, well, evil are coded references to gayness.

And seriously, as arguments about the Lord of the Rings demonstrate, I can read gay subtext into anything. Especially if the actors are hot. Mmm, Ewan McGregor, I’d like you to show me the ways of the Force . . .

I can see the idea that they’re anti-sex, though again it doesn’t seem like a strong one. True, the Jedi mostly seem pretty sex-less, and that’s common to all the movies. Luke never got laid. Han did, but Han was - well - a scoundrel. Surely not a figure to be idolized.

But anti-gay? I don’t see it, sister.

(Oh, and by the way: Jar Jar had a Stepin Fetchit accent if I’ve ever heard one.)

I completly agree with the idea that the movie is anti sex. In the viewpoint of myself growing up, the Jedi were somekinda cool knights, who could use real magic. Now that I have rewatched the trilogy, it seems like Lucas is trying to simultatiously have them be exactactly that, while at the same time making them some kinda zen monks. A recent online comic strip seems to make the same point. Sure, it is fine and dandy to have astetic monks who also fight, at least as an ideal (See the templars), but not only does it not work in reality, but it leads to nothing but harm.

P.S. Oh, and as to the anti-gay part, I didn’t see it any where in the movie, but then again, I see it everywhere, so on second thought, I agree with the Op, whatever the hell he said. :wink:

Too slow, scott, too slow.

Vader didn’t use Force lightning since he preferred to use his patented telekinetic choke for much the same purpose, and Dooku did use Force lightning. Don’t you remember in Attack of the Clones in the duel between Dooku and Yoda, where the green guy caught the Dook of Count’s lightning and threw it back at him?

And man, that’s gotta be some really good Corellian spice you’ve got there.