HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » LGBT Civil Rights and Activism (Group) » Lincoln Movie Ignores His...

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:04 PM

Lincoln Movie Ignores His Gay Proclivites

....... But it's still a great movie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/abraham-lincoln-gay-tony-kunsher-lincoln-biopic_n_2138062.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

66 replies, 4826 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 66 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lincoln Movie Ignores His Gay Proclivites (Original post)
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 OP
msongs Nov 2012 #1
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #9
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #2
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #3
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #4
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #5
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #8
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #11
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #13
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #14
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #17
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #19
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #22
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #26
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #28
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #32
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #18
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #20
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #21
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #23
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #24
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #25
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #27
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #29
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #30
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #33
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #35
merrily Nov 2012 #55
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #37
merrily Nov 2012 #54
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #60
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #61
Bluenorthwest Nov 2012 #6
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #7
Bluenorthwest Nov 2012 #15
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #16
Bluenorthwest Nov 2012 #44
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #48
Caroline-Vivienne Nov 2012 #10
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #12
Indykatie Nov 2012 #31
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #34
Kali Nov 2012 #38
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #39
Kali Nov 2012 #40
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #41
Kali Nov 2012 #42
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #46
Kali Nov 2012 #50
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #51
uppityperson Nov 2012 #43
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #45
uppityperson Nov 2012 #47
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #49
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #52
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #36
forest4qt Nov 2012 #53
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #57
merrily Nov 2012 #56
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #58
Cooley Hurd Nov 2012 #59
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #62
stevenleser Nov 2012 #63
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #64
stevenleser Nov 2012 #65
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #66

Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:07 PM

1. he was "lighthearted and carefree?" hmmm nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:07 PM

2. Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_of_Abraham_Lincoln

What you proclaim as fact has been determined to be mere gossip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:18 PM

3. First Sentence

Did you read what you posted?

First sentence: The sexual orientation of Abraham Lincoln is a topic of debate among some scholars.

Did you read ANY of the arguments presented as scholarly work (not gossip) in the link you referenced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:23 PM

4. every bit of it.

You post title states Abraham Lincoln's "gay proclivities" as fact.

That first sentence talks about his sexuality being a "topic of debate".

Something that is a "topic of debate" is not fact.

Please add the word "alleged" to your thread title.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:26 PM

5. Nah

You speak for yourself.

I'll do the same.

One's sexuality is not an accusation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:28 PM

8. I never said it was.

However, I deplore the use of sexuality to advance one's agenda(s) in the name of historical FACT.

See ya!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:31 PM

11. Agenda?

Are we talking heterosexual agenda or 'gay agenda'.

Let me guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:35 PM

13. It's YOUR agenda. Why did you post conjecture as fact in your OP?

Let's not drag the LGBT community into this. The OP came from your head...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:44 PM

14. Nice Deflect

You keep safe guarding your world view. I'm sure you join a long list of people who can confirm what you think.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:56 PM

17. Nice projection

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1169449#post11

Are we talking heterosexual agenda or 'gay agenda'.

Let me guess.


Deflection seems to be one of the first tools you reach for in your debate toolbox...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:59 PM

19. You Say

I have a 'gay agenda'... Then you say I have just my 'agenda' ....which is it.

What's your agenda? Oh right.... To protect the good name of Lincoln. Me too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:10 PM

22. I never even came close to saying you have a 'gay agenda'.

This is what you're down to in that debate toolbox of yours? Lying?

Talking of Lincoln's sexuality has nothing to do with his "good name". If he were indeed Gay, it would have no bearing on my deep respect and admiration of him. And, I would fight anyone, tooth and nail, who tried to besmirch him because of it.

Quite frankly, your OP is offensive because YOU were making some point about his (alleged) homosexuality.

I guess the projection tool is still sharp...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:27 PM

26. Interesting Choice of Words

You say 'If he were indeed Gay, it would have no bearing on my deep respect and admiration of him. And, I would fight anyone, tooth and nail, who tried to besmirch him because of it.'

See I think it does have bearing in a very positive way. And my admiration would not remain the same... It would increase even more. You think he would need more defending. That's the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:39 PM

28. Why would your admiration increase?

Are you that hung up on one's sexuality that it would change your opinion (positively OR negatively) about them? Wow. I was hoping we, as a society, were finally getting past that. I guess I was wrong... But, it DOES explain why you felt the need to post your OP. You're hung up on his sexuality, alleged or otherwise.

Lincoln was a person. His actions freed an entire race of people and saved the country. His sexuality means nothing to me. Just as his ethnic or racial backgrounds mean nothing to me.

Lincoln was a person.

Now run along Skippy...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:03 PM

32. Hung Up?

Last edited Tue Nov 20, 2012, 01:25 PM - Edit history (1)

No...I believe all I had to overcome because of my sexuality makes it a gift because I see the world different than you....and clearly Lincoln did as well.

Run along? Petty and small and certainly nothing to do with Lincoln.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:57 PM

18. Right

The 'use of sexuality' to what?


LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:00 PM

20. It was YOUR OP. You used the alleged sexuality of Lincoln to make whatever point...

...you were trying to make in your OP.

You brought up sexuality, Skippy. Not I...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:03 PM

21. Agenda?

I'm not furthering any agenda but if you think I have one, tell us what YOURS is.

Right...you don't have one (agenda.....not sexuality).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:19 PM

23. You DO realize the definition of the word "agenda" don't you?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agenda

Definition of AGENDA
1: a list or outline of things to be considered or done <agendas of faculty meetings>
2: an underlying often ideological plan or program <a political agenda>


Often ideological, but not exclusively.

Clearly, I used this term in the personal, not ideological sense.

Although, given your previous attempts to mischaracterize my use of it, I might be pissing up a rope since I'm not entirely convinced of your comprehension.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #23)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:23 PM

24. Question Remains

What's yours?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:26 PM

25. Facts.

I'm a broker of facts.

Now, back to the topic at hand. Why did you state conjecture as fact in your OP? And, why won't you correct it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:30 PM

27. Facts?

You 'think' he was heterosexual.

For every point of evidence you can point to, I can counter.

Facts? The link you provided reminds everyone, the 'facts' are open to interpretation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:41 PM

29. He was married to a woman and had children...

That makes him, by definition, heterosexual.

On edit: If the history books told us that Lincoln and Joshua Speed were partners in the modern sense, THEN your OP would be correct.

There's that comprehension thing again...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:59 PM

30. Well ...we now know what team you play for!

Good grief....being married and having children oversimplifies human sexuality. Anyone can get married to someone of the opposite sex. And anyone can have children.

I have numerous gay friends with children from previous heterosexual marriages.

Need more?

There have been several famous celebrities who are in a mixed-orientation marriage, including:

Anne Heche married Coleman Laffoon after breaking up with Ellen DeGeneres. She told The Advocate in 2001, "I have been very clear to everybody that just because I'm getting married does not mean I call myself a straight."

Julie Cypher married Matthew Hale after breaking up with Melissa Etheridge.

Margaret Cho is married to Al Ridenour and identifies as queer.

Anthony Perkins married Berry Berenson. He had previous relationships with Rock Hudson and Tab Hunter, dancer Rudolf Nureyev, composer/lyricist Stephen Sondheim and dancer-choreographer Grover Dale, but underwent therapy after meeting Victoria Principal.

Cole Porter, who was described as "an openly closeted gay man,"was married to Linda Lee Thomas. Their marriage was the subject of Night and Day, but his sexuality was ignored. A later film, De-Lovely, dealt more openly with his sexuality.

Billie Joe Armstrong of Green Day married Adrienne Nesser in 1994 and together they have two children. In a 1995 interview with The Advocate, he said "I think I've always been bisexual. I mean, it's something that I've always been interested in."

Oscar Wilde married Constance Lloyd, but may have had significant sexual relationships with Frank Miles, Robert Baldwin Ross, and Lord Alfred Douglas.

Little Richard was married in 1959 and his biography, The Life and Times of Little Richard, details his involvement with homosexuality.

Andrea Dworkin and John Stoltenberg were a lesbian and a gay man who were married to each other and continued to be gay rights activists.

Actress Liza Minnelli's first marriage was to impresario and performer Peter Allen, who was gay.

Painters Vanessa Bell and Duncan Grant lived together for 40 years and had a daughter together, but had a sexual relationship for only a short time, as Grant was openly gay.

Vita Sackville-West and Harold Nicolson were married for over 40 years and had two sons together, although both were homosexual. Their younger son Nigel wrote the book Portrait of a Marriage about his parents' relationship.

The love between writer Lytton Strachey and artist Dora Carrington is the subject of the film Carrington (1995). Although Strachey was openly gay, the two lived together for many years, and Carrington committed suicide upon Strachey's death from cancer, unable to live without him.

Poet Kathleen Raine had an enduring deep relationship with gay naturalist and writer Gavin Maxwell; she famously cursed him by wishing him to suffer as she had suffered from her love for him.

Adrian, a costume designer, was openly gay, but married Janet Gaynor in 1939. Together they had a son named Robin Gaynor Adrian, born in 1940. They remained married until Adrian's death on March 3, 1959. Though Gaynor later remarried, she and Adrian are buried in the Hollywood Forever Cemetery in Hollywood, California.

Megan Mullally married Nick Offerman in 2003. She commented in an interview in The Advocate magazine, "I consider myself bisexual, and my philosophy is, everyone innately is."

Alan Cumming has been married to a woman and then a man. He has identified himself as bisexual.
Alla Nazimova and Charles Bryant (actor) were married from 1912 to 1925, though Nazimova was romantically involved with Eva Le Gallienne, director Dorothy Arzner, writer Mercedes de Acosta, and Oscar Wilde's niece, Dolly Wilde.

Mercedes de Acosta was married to Abram Poole, though having several affairs with other women.
Marlene Dietrich was married to Rudolf Sieber. Together, they had one daughter, Maria Elisabeth Sieber

Tamara Karsavina was married to Henry James Bruce.

David Bacon and Greta Keller were married. Keller later said that Bacon was homosexual, and that she was lesbian, and that their marriage allowed both of them to maintain a respectable facade in Hollywood, where they were both attempting to establish film careers.

Guthrie McClintic and Katharine Cornell were both LGB and were married for 40 years.

Artist Frida Kahlo was married to fellow artist Diego Rivera. Both Frida and Diego had multiple affairs, some of Frida's affairs being with women.

Gay pornography actor Jack Wrangler was married to Margaret Whiting from 1994 until his death.

Gay television producer Peter Marc Jacobson was married to Fran Drescher from 1978 to 1999.
Charles Laughton, who was known to be gay during his life, was married to fellow actor Elsa Lanchester from 1929 until his death in 1962.


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-orientation_marriage

Recognize It?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:06 PM

33. Oh... "I have gay friends..."

I'm sure you also tell people "I have black friends".

Wow...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:09 PM

35. Difference Of Course is

I AM GAY.

LOL.


Notice how you did not refute one example I gave to refute your false assumptions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #30)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 02:59 AM

55. Even a man who is homosexual, not bisexual, can have children with a woman.

It can take only one time to make a baby.

And artificial insemination has been around since about 1890.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:48 PM

37. On Edit

You write: 'If the history books told us that Lincoln and Joshua Speed were partners in the modern sense, THEN your OP would be correct. '

The 'modern' sense doesn't exist for anyone who engaged in homosexuality a 100years ago.

That's why it's modern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #29)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 02:55 AM

54. Being married to a woman and having children by her does not make anyone heterosexual,

"by definition," or otherwise.


Homosexuality is about orientation, not behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #54)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:54 PM

60. By dictionary definition (which i was referring to) it does...

Obviously, there's a much broader definition when taken in the context of today.

My point with the OP was that he posted a statement as fact when it has never been established as fact that Lincoln either gay or bisexual.

I'm into historical accuracy. If he said in his OP that Lincoln was allegedly gay, that would've been accurate, but the OP was trying to prove a point by lying about the subject. As an historian, I abhor when people bend facts to try to fit a narrative they're trying to advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #60)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 07:49 PM

61. LOL

As a historian, your profession has never bent the facts...because what... You are historians?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:27 PM

6. Tony Kushner deals in established facts. He's a gay man and author of the play

Angels in America, not a man shy about gay facts but also not a man to play about with conjecture presented as history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:28 PM

7. Or Money

LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:47 PM

15. Yeah. Sure that's it.

Does this film spend lots of time around Abe's sexuality at all? Does it present itself as an all encompassing portrait of the entire man and his life? I doubt it. From what I've read it is largely about the passage of the 13th Amendment.
Kushner is a historian himself, worked on the screenplay for years. His entire career is based on the unlikely success of a play titled 'Angels In America: A Gay Fantasia On National Themes'.
These things have considerable weight where as cynical wise cracks have none.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:55 PM

16. See First Post

You are repeating much of what I said. It was, indeed, ignored.

PS- do you view being gay as cynical as you attribute to me. HINT: I don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:20 PM

44. No, being gay is not cynical, silly, what is cynical is making shitty comments about

a well known and respected man like Kushner without any shred of proof or evidence. It is morally absent to engage in that sort of attempt at character assasisnation without due cause. It is cynical and it is just stupid if you ask me. By which I mean your comments are both cynical and without merit.
I don't know any gay people who make allegations of moral corruption against others without any evidence. I do know many right wingers and straight folks who do so. I call it 'McCarthyite'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #44)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:44 PM

48. Character Assasination?

Good grief.

Calling someone gay is not an 'allegation of moral corruption' or 'character assassination.'

I call that homophobia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:30 PM

10. I've Read Quite A Bit About Lincoln

I don't believe the 'gay' theme for one minute.

Sharing your bed with another person of the same gender was common back then. It saved money for the young attorney (and his companions) when he was traveling.

And the wording and affectionate phrases people used with each other were much more 'flowery' back then. The letters from that era are quite syrupy, but you can't judge them using today's perspective.

And then someone mentions Lincoln's lack of female friends. That is true. Mary Todd Licoln was jealous to the point of insanity. Lincoln NEW BETTER than to ever talk or be friendly or nice to an attractive woman. And after the death of two of her sons and then Robert left to go join the war, she tipped right over...the general public was not aware of her continuing decline into insanity during Lincoln's presidency, but it was another burden he had to bear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Caroline-Vivienne (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:33 PM

12. Fair Enough

I disagree, but at least you made an argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:01 PM

31. The Movie Was Correct to Ignore Them Given Lack of Definitive Proof

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indykatie (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:08 PM

34. Right

Because two people always see the same thing when watching a movie....that's 'real'. Go back and look for the 'pins and needles' in the movie (that's a gay expression used by many older gays).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #34)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 04:36 PM

38. pins and needles, a gay expression?

say what?

hmm both my mother and grandmother used that term, both about as straight as you can be...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kali (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 04:37 PM

39. Ok

...and what does it mean to them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #39)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 04:53 PM

40. the same two things it means to just about anybody

that tingly sensation when your foot goes to sleep or slight anxiety as in "waiting on pins and needles"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/on+pins+and+needles

pins and needles
pl.n.
A tingling sensation felt in a part of the body numbed from lack of circulation.
Idiom:
on pins and needles
In a state of tense anticipation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kali (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 05:13 PM

41. Different Meaning in Gay Lexicon

used to mean dropping hints recognizable to other gays (example: 'I'm a friend of Dorothy'....gay icon in Wizard of Oz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 06:36 PM

42. got a cite for that?

I couldn't find anything on the google linking the term to the word "gay" - and I sure don't remember it from my more urban days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kali (Reply #42)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:41 PM

46. Queen's Venacular

Look it up in the Queen's Venacular. That's a very famous and now rare gay lexicon I bought in the 80s at Lambda Rising (gay bookstore in DC).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #46)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 08:12 PM

50. ok I am crazy but I just ordered it = 20 + shipping off amazon

sounds hilarious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kali (Reply #50)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 08:16 PM

51. It's an Incredible Buy

Oh my goodness, you just bought history. I had no idea it was on Amazon. It is rich with all types of lost language. It's amazing. It is very rare! Congratulations! You are going to find it amazing. Most of it is no longer used. Great investment. WOW!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 06:54 PM

43. The Scarecrow was the "gay icon"? My research shows more the Cowardly Lion. Pins&needles= intellect

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/the-wizard-of-oz?before=1338156412
the Wizard places an amalgamation of bran, pins, and needles in the Scarecrow’s head to inspire intellect


http://andinhomenezes.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/the-wonderful-wizard-of-oz/
We can see that when Dorothy goes there she finds out two friends with rural and industrial characteristics and they go ahead to the journey and soon they meet the Cowardly Lion, the Lion has a gay characteristics like everybody thinks, softly and a animal that is afraid to show courage.


Of course, I am only searching what is available on the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:37 PM

45. Dictionary?

I bet gay means happy as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #45)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:42 PM

47. No use of dictionary there. Try to keep up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #47)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:46 PM

49. Yawn






.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #47)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 09:09 PM

52. TBS Has the Wizard of Oz on Now



.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indykatie (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:26 PM

36. Have You Seen the Movie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 02:26 AM

53. not a biography

Lincoln is not a biography but about a specific 4 month period in 1865. As an out lesbian I realize that not everything is about lbgt civil rights. Even if Lincoln had been a gay man with a family what difference does it make today? Another historical figure who was gay. And???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest4qt (Reply #53)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:50 AM

57. Ahhm

Agree on the four month window.

As to whether or not being a homosexual has changed or influenced someone's world view, you tell me. I know it has for me. What you characterize as 'another historical figure who was gay' seems to diminish its significance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 03:22 AM

56. Was his sexuality (or alleged sexuality) relevant to the plot?

The movie is based upon Doris Kearns' Goodwin's historical account of a certain time period in Lincoln's life, so if she did not cover it in her book, it would not be in the movie.

I don't know about Goodwin, but his co-author, Kushner, is an out gay man and Speilberg is liberal, so I don't think there was any agenda involved in omitting mention of the possibility that Lincoln was gay or bisexual.


IMO, it will be a good day for everyone when mentioning the orientation of a gay person is not expected as a matter of routine. If a movie is about the conflict Lincoln may have suffered because of his sexuality, then sure, his orientation would be relevant. If it's about getting the 13th amendment passed and Lincoln was not fucking Lee, then maybe Lincoln's sexuality is not relevant to the plot?

IMO, it will be a good day when we don't feel compelled to reference the sexuality of every person who is gay or transgendered, anymore than we reference heterosexuality every time we name a person who is heterosexual (as far as we know, anyway).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #56)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:15 AM

58. Ok

That's one argument and I don't necessarily disagree. For that to happen, the notion of discrimination and violence has to be eradicated and I don't see that happening anytime soon. Let's just take the Catholic Church who arguably advocates neither but who funds advocacy groups who want to treat gays differently. So long as we are treated differently, the notion of homosexuality is going to perhaps influence our worldview, life choices, perhaps our faith and politics. And that's why, in my opinion, it's important to include that in the whole picture of who a person is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #56)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:44 PM

59. exactly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #59)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:29 PM

62. see Post 58

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Original post)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:04 PM

63. Proclivities implies a negative connotation. You are saying being gay is something bad.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proclivity

Definition of PROCLIVITY

: an inclination or predisposition toward something; especially : a strong inherent inclination toward something objectionable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #63)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:33 PM

64. Nah

Read the complete thread and you would not need to ask.

Here is how I use the word:

From Dictionary.com
pro·cliv·i·ty   
noun, plural pro·cliv·i·ties.
natural or habitual inclination or tendency; propensity; predisposition: a proclivity to meticulousness.


So...no....a natural and habitual inclination with a propensity and predisposition to being a homosexual or gay or queer is not negative but fabulous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #64)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:35 PM

65. Every usage I have seen has been the negative connotation variety. I doubt you did that accidentally

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #65)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:45 PM

66. Every Use?

Apparently you didn't read my usage or Dictionary.com's definition. See how it was used in the original post (see the part where I say it 'ignores his gay proclivities but it's still a good movie'). That usage implies proclivities is a good thing as is the movie as is being gay ('Gay is Good!' as the old activist chant once used).

Regardless, you are welcome to have that debate on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread