This Gay Man is Finally Over the Oscars

the nominees for best picture this year are the most diverse selection i've ever seen at the oscars. My favorite is There Will Be Blood, which will go down as the most bat shit insane modern classic since Apocalypse Now.I'll be rooting for Julie Christie, who was magnificent in "away from her". Calling it a 'snooze-fest" reminds me of one of my friends, who refuses to go see a movie unless there are at least "three explosions in it".

http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/

and I think I can speak for both of us when I say explosions need not make a movie for it to be interesting. But I also find myself incredibly disinterested in the Oscars and I think a lot of it has to do with Brokeback Mountain. Every time I hear the word Oscar, I flash back to my stunned disbelief that Crash won and my belief that the only reason it one was due to homophobia. So why do I want to hang out with a bunch of folks who profess to be really cool with me, but when push comes to shove, aren't?

like you, many people i know, including me also haven't watched the oscars/could care less since the BBM loss. oh well.

I'm sorry....I still love 'em!

Yeah, they often screw it up. I've read that some in the voting pool vote for an actor or flick just so someone else won't win--even if the one they vote for isn't the best. And of course the Academy is diverse. As Mark Twain observed, "it's differences of opinion that make horse races."

With respect to the Oscar races in question (and with respect for your opinion!)....I understand there are a lot of gays who are disillusioned (not delusional--inside joke) about the Academy Awards. I suppose I understand why if its loss really was an issue of homophobia versus a [more likely?] split over two really great movies. [See my previous post "Through the Eyes of Oscar: Does He See Progress" http://www.afterelton.com/node/14055#comment-34288].

Perhaps I just haven't been gay ("out") long enough to appreciate the importance of the "fight" or am just not as zealous as many of my fellow TV/Movie-philes. But I don't watch (and never have watched) the Oscars just because something/someone gay may have been nominated anymore than I choose my TV shows because of gay characters (unless there are hot naked guys, hence my shameful interest in my husband's guilty pleasure, The Janice Dickenson Trainwreck, er Agency). And I maintain that as far as overall societal issues and the importance of dealing with prejudice, Crash was just as significant as BBM.

Because of one aspect of my identity, a gay character/theme certainly gives something more appeal. [i.e Brothers & Sisters] I also think i grasp the importance of our lifestyle and identity being shown in positive, normal situations the more progress we make. [i.e. B&S] However, that factor alone does not determine whether I like the Oscars. [Husband HATES the Oscars and awards shows in general. So I'm sure I'll find myself on the couch alone as the show drifts on toward 11:30 hahaah.)

But I know this isn't the gist of your column. I wonder if you're [also] hinting at the relevance of the Oscars. I mean, it really is a party where a bunch of people most of us will never know personally all get together and congratulate themselves. Kinda like a teamsters ceremony where they give out Best Engineer and Best Constructed Auto [damn foreign imports]. Who cares!  [But then the teamsters don't generally dress up as fabulous or have a naked male statue like the Academy....not that I've ever been to a Teamsters Awards Ceremony.]

But how relevant are the Oscars anyway? And why does anyone care?!

Ultimately, though, I will make my hors d'oeuvres, put on my tux, pour my wine, grab my ballot, and hop on the couch to watch the Oscars, if for no other reason than...

...to catch what hilarious thing Jon Stewart does or says, or
...to catch the controversial acceptance speech that has everyone standing
   and cheering (or gasping), or
...to see the most talked about moment of the night.
   [Maybe there will be a streaker--the funniest moment EVER], or
...to see who is the most gorgeous. AND THE MOST TRAGIC, or
...to see if there are any upsets, or
...to experience any uplifting moments.

It's all fantasy for me and I love it!

Of course, I'm well aware that the night could be a total bore...and yet I won't call it a total loss. At the end of the ceremony, I still get to go crawl in bed and curl up beside Husband [there's an obvious Oscar joke here but I respect the seriousness of this site so i'll refrain from being crass ;)]  who will have lost interest hours earlier.

_______
PS: Thanks for telling us some of the back-story of (and your partner's involvement in) Freeheld. The subject matter of this documentary is something many of us are passionate--and very very concerned--about. That's a cause worth making some noise about.

_______
PPS: I don't really wear a tux to watch the Oscars.

__________________________
whoever you are, just be you

As much as I love Reese Witherspoon, why on EARTH did they honor her over over Felicity Huffman for TransAmerica.

Reese was charming and wonderful as June Cash.
Powerful, heartbreaking, and affecting, she most certainly was not.

Portraying Bree Osborne, Huffman delivered the stand-out performance of that year (perhaps even over Hoffman's Capote and Ledger's Del Mar). While I do not identify with the character she played, I understand and appreciate the gravitas and signifince of the role.

The decision to award her with no more than a nomination still has me somewhat sour toward the Academy as much as any other bad call they've made.

OK. I'm done now. I promise! :)

__________________________
whoever you are, just be you

I'm glad i watched last year, otherwse i would have missed "that moment". you know, the one priceless moment in every oscar telecast that gives you a special thrill. whether it's halle's acceptance speech, or rob lowe singing a duet with snow white, or that costume designer with the american express gown, etc.

for me, last year, it was the look on eddie murphy's face when he lost to alan arkin.

priceless....and so worth it.

 

http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/

 

I think I spent so much energy a couple years ago on hoping, talkng, writing about and wishing for a Brokeback Best Pic win that it's significantly drained my interest for Oscar. I'll still watch -- like I did last year, but the days of elablorate Oscar pools and parties are on hold for a while.

Who knows... maybe next year at this time we'll all be anticipating wins for Gus Van Sant, Sean Penn and the rest of the "Milk" crew... we'll see. Until the academy decides to join the rest of us in the 21st century, I'll be content to participate from afar.

or any other awards show, I figure I have gotta to have better things to do with my time then listen to a bunch over inflated egos groaning on and on about how wonderful they are, their partners are, God, their Mother, their hairdresser, etc..

My favourite picture last year was "Juno" because it was quirky and heartwarming.  Overall though the quality of movies has been going steadily downhill since the 1970's ended (except for some good foreign films).  I liked "Brokeback Mountain" but I never saw "Crash" so I can't compare the two (my partner preferred Crash).  "The Lord of The Rings" was very good even if it did not follow the plot more than 75% of the time!

Cheers

JBE

I love the Oscars, but after the Brokeback Mountain fiasco it has lost all the excitement. i thought the feeling would pass, but I most confess I am still piss off about the clearly homophobic decision. I don't know, something broke. And having Ellen host the oscars the following year did not make it alright. For me it was just adding insult to injury. Like here, see, we have one of you hosting, now get over it.

 

I have had a long life love affair with the oscars, like any self-respecting gay man, but Oscar cheated, and that i can't forgive.

When Brokeback Mountain lost two years ago to the far inferior Crash, it was then I lost all interest and respect for the Oscars.

I remember, leading up to Oscar night there were rumors that some Academy members had refused to watch the film and planned to vote for Crash, a movie which received at best, mediocre reviews from most critics. I didn't want to believe the rumors coming out of hollywood that something bad was going to go down that Oscar night. I refused to believe Academy members would wear their homophobia as though it were a badge of honor, Tony Curtis being one of them. I didn't want to believe when Spike Lee, the only one if I recall, said several times in a couple of interviews that Brokeback Mountain was not going to win the Oscar for best picture. Spike Lee knew what was being said/planned behind the scenes. So when Crash was called for best picture, I just couldn't believe what I had just heard. I honestly thought Jack Nickelson was pulling a joke...only he wasn't. Never in the history of Oscars had a movie like BrokeBack Mountain, which had raked in a tower of awards from just about every award show in the States gone on to loose the main prize. Hell, even the Bristish verson to the Oacars, BAFTA got it right giving Brokeback best picture. But the Oscars, a place bubbling with many homophobes just couldn't bring themselves to award such a brilliant and well deserving move. So I tunned out and don't plan to tunned back it. The Oscars now means nothing to me, where before I use to enjoy it very much and looked forward to it each year.  I think ever since that fateful night, the Oscars lost a lot of credibility.

 

 

afhickman

"It takes a village (to make Village People)"

TV Guide has published its list of Ten Biggest Oscar upsets, and Brokeback is positioned at number 9.  I don't know if the ranking means anything.  I still don't think "Crash" was even eligible, as it was first aired in 2004.  Here's what TV Guide has to say:

"We were naive to think that a beautifully told, tragic romance about gay sheepherders could win. You could almost hear the reaction echoing through the hills: What's Crash?"

You can have the Oscars.  I'm watching the BAFTAs from here on out. 

This is my first post so do forgive if I'm timid.  The Oscars, to me at least, is something that is less about the big stuff and more about the small.  I will admit that I like the glitz of it all, but I think the beauty of the Oscars is that it is a time when everyone involved in a film (high grossing or not) is able to be a star - just for a night.  Think of all of the writers that didn't work for the last few months and the people that it put out of work and then juxtapose that against the backdrop where it is not just actors and producers that are acknowledged for their contributions, but everyone who makes a movie great.  Be they costume designers, editors or sound guys (or gals) the whole thing is about what it is to make a movie and I'll be the first to admit that we were not exactly given a year of movies to stand in line to see, but the fact that most years we are says something about Hollywood.

I also admit that I belong to that segment of the population that is considered conservative so it always makes me crazy when people on the right (and the left) decide to politicize something as innocent as film.  True, there are some activists in the industry, but they have always been there.  The Oscars should be watched (or at least paid attention to) because for better or worse the awards show us just how many people are involved in movie making and I think that the ability of a guy with scissors or a gal with a computer can walk out of the theater with a little statue is an amazing equalizer.  Films are meant to be enjoyed and sometimes we don't, but you don't have to treat the Oscars like Christmas - maybe think of them like Saint Patty's Day when you have an excuse to get dressed up (or not), have a party and celebrate the fact that the film industry endures over sometimes impossible odds.

Hope my virgin post wasn't too circular, but I like the Hollywood glamour and only wish there were not so many ceremonies so the Oscars could keep their place in the Pantheon of ceremonies instead of a predictable night of little more than reviews of who is wearing what gems from Harry's that year. 

KICK BROKEBACK TO THE CURB ONCE AGAIN!

 http://www.laweekly.com/film+tv/film/horsefeathers/5/

While I'm Not There is quite obviously this year's best picture, among the nominees There Will Be Blood is the standout. And Michael Clayton (starrign the babe-a-licious George Clooney) is real teriffic too.

Needless to say the Oscar will go to the Coen Brothers and  their mess-terpiece No Time For Shitheads, with Javier Barden winning for Best Supporting Haircut. Cate Blanchett may well win Best Supporting Drag King for her superb Bob Dylan, but she may lose to Ruby Dee for The Last Gangsta Momma on the Couch Movie

As for Best Actress my dream would be a tie between Marion Cotillard and Julie Christie, but I'd be happy if either won.

I'll be very unhappy if it goes to The Terminally Annoying Munchkin who played the pregnant gerbil in that digusting "Pro-Life" Commercial Disguised as a Movie.

 

 

 

I think it's the most mindnumbingly boring show lol. However I will be pulling for There will be Blood and Daniel Day-lewis and Thompson. I think it's one hell of a movie. You will either hate it or love it, very much like Brokeback in that sense.

I had a lot of friends that hated Brokeback. I happen to love both Brokeback and Crash.

I haven't seen Juno, or Michael Clayton, but I'm not a Clooney fan and I don't see what all the hoopla is with him, and in my opinion, he doesn't come close to Day-Lewis in the acting department.

I just saw La Vie en Rose, and Cotillard is great, but I gotta go for Christie since it was directed by a Canadian lol.

...because it didn't deserve to win...?  I'm not saying "Crash" was a better film; I enjoyed both films for what they were.  But I refuse to be the gay Al Sharpton.

 

I have to laugh, even today, that gays are still reeling over ‘Brokeback Mountain’ losing the Best Picture Oscar to ‘Crash’, which had less to do with homophobia – as the gay press LOVES to state - and more to do with film-industry politics.  I predicted ‘Crash’ would win weeks before it did – and not necessarily because it was a better film, but because it was one of those self-important, socially-conscious (well-made? Sure!) white-guilt films that divided critics and a nation, and which seemed to employ every actor in Hollywood.  Some of the finest critics in the world loved ‘Crash’ (Roger Ebert (who called it the best film of the year), Lisa Schwarzbaum, David Denby etc.) and some hated it.   

I feel that those same types of over-reactions are what bestowed the over-praising of ‘Brokeback Mountain’, a very good, if a little slow moving. It was THE gay-guilt film…critics stumbling over themselves to over-praise a mainstream (FINALLY!!!) well-made gay love story, beautifully shot, directed by a heterosexual man and acted by a heterosexual cast (gay men’s weird infatuation with droopy Jake notwithstanding)… 

My opinions on ‘Brokeback Mountain’ as a film are irrelevant, I understand, just as any non-Academy member’s is.  But Oscar’s history is scattered with unworthy socially-conscious Best Picture wins over more deserved, better films - ‘Gandhi’ beating out ‘E.T.’, ‘In The Heat Of The Night’ beating ‘Bonnie & Clyde’, ‘Ordinary People’ over ‘Raging Bull’, ‘Forrest Gump’ over ‘Pulp Fiction’ etc…etc… 

And, trust me, ‘Crash’ beating ‘Brokeback’ wasn’t as upsetting as ‘Shakespeare In Love’ beating ‘Saving Private Ryan’.   

The only ‘debacle’ of the Oscars that night was giving the Best Actor prize to Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s ‘Capote’ over Heath’s legendary performance in the film.  

The thing that I loathe about the Oscars is the fashion – I despise the fashion industry and the obsession that America has with it.  I mean, fashion did kill rock and roll after all.  And the importance of the insipid parade of designer gowns and red carpet hoopla is the bleeding tampon of every awards telecast. 

So, get over the ‘BBM/Crash’ “debacle” already.  Most of the times the fun of the Oscars is yelling at the TV for them getting it wrong.   

 

 

The only ‘debacle’ of the Oscars that night was giving the Best Actor prize to Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s ‘Capote’ over Heath’s legendary performance in the film. 

boy do I ever agree with this. Heath's performance was just sublime. That Oscar should of been his, no doubt.

afhickman

"It takes a village (to make Village People)"

"The mountain has wings"

Here we go again.  The one place you might expect to find a sympathetic ear for this kind of grousing is on AfterElton.  Of course people are going to dispute to the end of time which movie is best, because it all comes down to a matter of taste: De gustibus non disputandum.  I much preferred “Shakespeare in Love” to “Saving Private Dipshit.”  Two good films, two different votes for the Oscar.  Although I certainly agree with you that Heath Ledger’s performance was superior to Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s (how much talent does it take to do an imitation of Truman Capote, for chrissake?).  Again, it’s all a matter of taste.  You’re not going to change my mind, and I’m not going to change yours.   My point is simply that “Crash” should not have been eligible for the award at all, as it was released in Canada (at the Toronto Film Festival) a full year before “Brokeback.”  Producers rush to release their films at Christmas time for this very reason: so they’ll qualify for the Academy Awards.  Thus, “Crash” should have been submitted in 2005 for the 2004 awards (it did win an AFI award for 2004).  I don’t mention this because I want to go on a crusade—the awards are over and done with, and I’m tired of shouting myself blue in the face (though I turn a lovely shade of blue, if I do say so myself)—but only because it’s fact.  The same rules, after all, kept Emmy Lou Harris from being nominated for “A Love That Will Never Grow Old” because the song wasn’t performed for at least fifteen seconds or otherwise featured prominently in the film (I believe I’m stating this rule correctly, but someone might offer a clarification).  Again, I might want to argue, but those are the rules.  The rules were broken in this case in favor of a film from 2004 being nominated for an Academy Award for best picture of 2005, and I am simply pointing this fact out.  So take that, kneejerk (insert appropriate emoticon with my tongue sticking out).  You’d be advised to save your contempt, not for the “gays who are still reeling,” but for the Academy members who bent the rules to let “Crash” win. 

I've got much more important things to do than watch a load of self important sycophants get up and ooze their greasy insincere thanks to everyone they know including the person who shampoos the dog.

Important things to do, like shampooing the dog for instance.  

 

afhickman

"It takes a village (to make Village People)"

"I mean, clearly unfortunately it’s hate that makes the world go round, not love, and if anyone thinks otherwise, they’re fools.  Sad, but regrettably a fact of life.  And if you don’t believe me, ask any of your black or Hispanic friends - they suffer more hate than we homosexuals ever did, or probably will."

Your self-loathing seems to come from a very deep place. I pity anyone who can't see that love is far superior to hate, even though the haters do occasionally appear to get the upper hand. You are new to this site; stick around awhile, and you might just begin to feel the love, one important aspect of which is our love for "Brokeback Mountain," the most important film of the last 25 years (notice I didn't say "best").  I think my gay black and Hispanic friends would agreee.

"The mountain has wings." 

        

I have to agree with Brent Hartinger. Not awarding Brokeback Mountain "Best Picture" was an egregious affront to the gay community and any fair minded person. What a hollow victory for those involved in the making of Crash. I remember a woman recounting on another site that she went to an afternoon matinee shortly after that debacle and a group of six or seven retirement aged ladies had taken up the row in front of her. She thought of moving because they where so chatty, but stayed put since it might be interesting to hear their comments, if any. At the end one of the elderly ladies declared, loud enough for her group and really the entire theater to hear "Now that should have won Best Picture"! So true.

I am just not interested in award shows. Who cares what the Academy thinks? The only good that I see coming from them is that it brings attention to films that some may have not seen nor considered seeing. This is what annoyed me about BrokeBack not taking the award. As it turns out the film had enough notoriety on it's own and from the buzz over Heath Ledger's performance. While I really liked Crash it just was not better then BB. To me the way I judge a film's merit is if I can watch it several times and still come away with something different each time. I saw Crash twice but I knew the story and the second viewing did not give me more to think about. I have watched BB several times and have picked up something knew from it each time. I watched what I originally thought was a gay movie and have gradually seen that it has universal meaning. I interpreted it as two men who could not love each other because of the stigma of homosexuality. I see now that while that may have been part of it I now think that it is a story of a person who meets the love of his life but is unable to allow himself to love. He cannot even open himself up to his daughters. The ending of the film was sad but uplifting because his daughter reached out to him and he accepted it. For me awards and reviews mean nothing I will see and judge things for myself. While critics may have a great understanding of films it is ultimately only an opinion. 

I stopped watching the Oscar telecast years ago, but only after I realized, as is now the case with As the World Turns, that I was bored to death by most of the telecast, and was watching out of habit rather than enjoyment. I used to get really excited to see if my favorite performances/movies of the year would win. I also enjoyed seeing first time nominees, unexpected moments, and the gay cliché, the fashions. Whether it was Bjork rocking the house with something totally out of place, or seeing Michelle Williams looking like movie star from Hollywood’s heyday, it was fun to see big time celebrities getting all dolled-up.

These days, I use the internet to find out about what interests me. I may miss out on the great feeling that I got seeing say a Susan Sarandon win an Oscar live, as she’s one of my favorite performers, but with changes in technology, I can find what interest me the most and not endure a 4+ plus hour time investment in something that ultimately bores me to no end. I can empathize with Brent’s lack of enthusiasm over this year’s show in particular, as the nominees are dull (to me), but I was extremely surprised to read that lingering feelings over Brokeback Mountain not taking home the Oscar have anything to do with it.

I too was disappointed to see Brokeback not take the prize and suspect that homophobia had something to do with it, but nothing that I’ve read to date serves as compelling proof that it did not win due to homophobia, or that, POSSIBLY MORE IMPORTANT FOR ME, that a win by Brokeback would have meant anything other than as little as 20.1% of the voters chose that movie over the four others up for the award. Keep this statistic in mind as people forget that we are talking about a few votes here and there possibly being seen as a reflection of something more powerful than it might truly be.

Homophobia is alive and kicking in every nook and cranny of almost every business. Instead of using Brokeback’s Oscar loss try to draw macro-level conclusions about homophobia in Hollywood or by the Academy, I’d suggest that better proof may be found in that Brokeback’s irrefutable financial success failed to give us a bunch of clones, as it’s all about cash. No gay-theme loved stories or even gay-inclusive stories followed. Maybe if the upcoming biopic on Harvey Milk succeeds, it will continue to encourage financial backers to see the upside potential that a gay-centric movie can have.

There have been movies which have been as deserving as Brokeback Mountain which did not even receive Oscar nominations when they came out, as well as winners like Chariots of Fire, which left people as shocked about something that should not be that shocking given how little support it takes to win. When actors/directors say that it’s an honor just to be nominated, believe them, as the Oscar nominees are the result of votes by their peers in their discipline. Actors vote only for actors, directors for directors, cinematographers for cinematographers, etc. The only exception is Best Picture, as all Academy members get to vote in that category as well.

Even with existing homophobia, Brokeback received the most nominations of any movie that year. Let’s not forget that votes are highly affected by marketing. It is believed that the team behind Crash, a film which I also enjoyed, slammed Academy voters with DVDs right before the voting deadline. Some have pointed to aggressive campaigning, mastered by the Weinstein brothers at Miramax, as being exceptionally successful in securing Oscar nominations/wins. The poster child for this appears to be 1998’s Oscar-winning Shakespeare in Love.

For once, I’d seen all the nominated movies, and preferred Elizabeth over the winner by a mile. I also thought that Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line was head and shoulders above the rest, including Saving Private Ryan. I don’t think that one can draw any conclusions about the Academy, except that they put on a boring show and that they make some lousy ones but that they are just the opinions of a few people.

If there are any actors reading this and you want to make sure that your role choices lead you to the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in the future, the link gives you all that you need to know. I just learned that it worked for another performer who won an Oscar tonight:

http://www.afterelton.com/blog/brianjuergens/sag-awards-glamorous-assemblage-homosexuals-prostitutes-ever#comment-33504

If Ernest Borgnine, Tony Curtis (who is beyond bitter that he’s never gotten any love from the Academy), Spike Lee (who needs to be taken with a grain of salt his a little bitter too), or anyone in the media makes homophobic remarks, we should do our part to document it, let others know, and take all the steps possible to make sure that they are taken to task for it. Isaiah Washington may be proof that by not crying wolf, we can have an impact. I don’t see Oscar is my friend or my enemy. His parties bore me and I don’t look to them or anyone else to validate my choices. Even the Independent Spirit Awards, sometimes totally ignore what I like.

In light of how many people are still bitter about recent slights, I remind myself that if the Academy were 100% homophobic, then documentaries like "The Trials of Harvey Milk" and "Common Threads: Stories from the Quilt", the short film "Trevor" or this year's Documentary Short Subject winner "Freeheld" would not have won Oscars. Those wins don't sofen the blow of Brokeback. I believe someone winning an Oscar for Best Picture is the same as someone winning an Oscar in any other category. As much as I agree that I don't watch the Oscar for who will win Documentary Short Subject or Sound Mixing, if the topic is important, then I will take the time to view the work and I hope "Freeheld" will get the chance to be viewed by more people.

Then again, I chose to not take the Oscars oh-so-seriously back in the early 1970s when "Cabaret" won 8 awards and ends up losing to "The Godfather" for Best Picture. As much as it would be nice for my favorite movies to be nominated or win, my own memories of a film are more important than the awards it may or may not earn. 

I think it's a damn shame to see this from a gay media outlet the year that the final moment of the broadcast is an openly gay winner for Best Picture giving a loving tribute to his partner.

And what do you know -- Freeheld did win. Congratulations for the part you played in bringing the story to light, even if you are "over it" now.

 

 I can't get over these Gays, expressing shock over Brokeback Mountain losing

Best Picture to a trifle like Crash. The history of Hollywood all but sealed the

Gay cowboy love story's fate. William Haines, Tommy Kirk, William Eythe,

Bobby Driscoll, George Nader, etc. all had promising careers short-circuited

for being homosexual. Only Rock Hudson was spared because he agreed to

a well-publicized marriage to a woman. Others like Monty Clift and James

Dean died pre-maturely. Spike Lee, who hates the Academy and doesn't

care who knows it, was right to say a movie about two guys in love doesn't

stand a chance of winning. This is so because the last thing they want is such

a sexually explicit film contaminating their precious Best Picture pantheon.

Movies that cover Gay subjects winning minor awards, like Trevor, Freeheld,

and The Times of Harvey Milk, are crumbs tossed our way. Moreover, the

thanking of a Gay partner of an award recipient at the podium was fashionable

twenty years ago. Today, such gestures make little sense. The 2006 Oscars show

was the last I've seen or will ever see. In view of this year's dismal showing in

the ratings...millions have followed me. They are antiquated, dull, and lacking

credibility. Too many have been burned by their big promise, small result

formula. While audiences have progressed, the industry hasn't. Subsequently,

the closet still rules. Treating a movie like Brokeback Mountain with due respect

is like expecting the NFL to welcome a Gay quarterback on its team...it ain't

gonna happen, fellas.