I haven't seen the movie.

When ideas break into the movie world they can be a harbinger of wider held future social mores.

Dana implies no homosexual tendencies with these guys. Here we have two heterosexual men relatively comfortably considering homosexual sex and one of them married.

Ladies, when you run out in support of your gay friends rights to marry you'll be pushing your daughter's husband (if not yours) into the arms of other men. Enjoy the hiv.

By the sounds of it, It's a stupid movie that by no means resembles reality as it is now nor probably ever. Heterosexual males will not dump their women for another male. If they do, they never were heterosexual and should never had married the woman and stolen her best years.

ssshhhhh yanny, ssssssshhhhhhhhhhhh, sleep, sleep, deep. don't let these thoughts concern you. they are nothing. hetero men don't sleep with other men. never have, never will, and if they do, well those numbers will never, ever increase.

hahahaha......

Yanny, your presumption that its a either/or factor regarding gayness is not correct. According to Kinsey, there's a large number of men who could go either way at various times in their lives. If Kinsey is close to accurate, than promotion of gayness in public would lead to increase in the number of men engaging in gay sex.

The reality is that there are men who engage in heterosexual sex for years and then go through phases in which they choose gay sex. The public tolerance and actual promotion of gayness has led to increases in effeminate teen boys lacking strong heterosexual male role models. Slate ran an article recently wherein there men who have lived gay and have chosen to be heterosexual again.

The original point is fairly accurate : the morals of America are spinning in a dire direction.

<link>

Why did I just KNOW the comments section for this review would be chock full o' homophobic dimwits? Perhaps because I have mystical powers!

"germaphobic dimwits" if you please.

No, I think my characterization is more accurate. I enjoy watching people like you shrieking to wake the dead as your irrational prejudices become more and more social untenable. Enjoy your Stromfrontification!

Fact is I don't mind. It in the end is evolution.

I simply call it fair warning.

BigLR:

I haven't seen the movie.

When ideas break into the movie world they can be a harbinger of wider held future social mores.

Dana implies no homosexual tendencies with these guys. Here we have two heterosexual men relatively comfortably considering homosexual sex and one of them married.

Ladies, when you run out in support of your gay friends rights to marry you'll be pushing your daughter's husband (if not yours) into the arms of other men. Enjoy the hiv.

This is a movie about two guys who make a rather stupid dare while stoned and then keep telling each other that not to go through with it is a sign they're not macho enough (gay sex as a sign of heterosexual daring-ood, but not inconceivable). As for the destruction of heterosexuality, well, that's been predicted by reactionary hysterics for centuries now. it hasn't happened. And it won't.

This is about disease not the destruction of heterosexuality.

Yanny, your presumption that its a either/or factor regarding gayness is not correct. According to Kinsey, there's a large number of men who could go either way at various times in their lives.

So far, so good.

If Kinsey is close to accurate, than promotion of gayness in public would lead to increase in the number of men engaging in gay sex.

Nonsense. Engagement in sex is still volitional, and still likely tied to interest. Only men with at least a nominal level of attraction to other men are likely to engage in such activity.

It's worth noting that even in countries like Iran, where Sharia law makes penalties for homosexual activity far more severe than in more liberal countries, homosexual activity, measured as a percentage of total sexual activity, seems to occur at the same rate. If punishing it severely does little to curb it, why do you think "promoting" it (not that I think a film like this does so, but I'll use the word for expediency's sake) would do much to increase it?

Nonsense. Engagement in sex is still volitional, and still likely tied to interest. Only men with at least a nominal level of attraction to other men are likely to engage in such activity.

You ignore the point here that culture can change behavior of men and women. If it is acceptable for men to date men you are going to find a much larger population engaging in that behavior. It may take a generation or two (20-40 years) but it will happen.

It's worth noting that even in countries like Iran, where Sharia law makes penalties for homosexual activity far more severe than in more liberal countries, homosexual activity, measured as a percentage of total sexual activity, seems to occur at the same rate. If punishing it severely does little to curb it, why do you think "promoting" it (not that I think a film like this does so, but I'll use the word for expediency's sake) would do much to increase it?

This is total b.s. unless you have a source and then your source has to vetted (exactly how do they determine total homosexual activity and then how is that comparison made?).

. . . on self-reporting, if I understand correctly. Which makes them unreliable. But it makes them unreliable in a way that favors the argument that social controls fail, as one would expect people living in a highly conservative culture to underreport any controversial activity.

Been a while since I've read it; I couldn't locate it now. Feel free to dismiss it. Frankly, I don't much care if punishing homosexuality eliminates it or promoting it doubles its frequency; I just remember finding it interesting that punishment and allowance don't appear to have any effects at all.

You ignore the point here that culture can change behavior of men and women.

Within certain parameters, yes.

If it is acceptable for men to date men you are going to find a much larger population engaging in that behavior.

I suspect that it'll just shift from people engaging in it covertly to people engaging in it overtly. Of course, that'll probably look the same statistically, since it's easier to count people doing it in the open.

It may take a generation or two (20-40 years) but it will happen.

It's an interesting speculation. I don't know how you'd back that up with data, and I'm still not sure why it matters. But there's really no accounting for where one places urgency.

I don't know how you'd back that up with data, and I'm still not sure why it matters.

The point here is disease. If the assertion is right disease rates will sky rocket. We'll end up with Africa like numbers (even half that rate would be crushing).

And yes, I do dismiss your memory. Maybe moslems denied greater access to women (and not necessarily sexually speaking) do engage in higher rates of homosexual behavior and what was self-reported was an under representation of truth. That too would speak to culture affecting the sexual behavior of people. You evidently didn't think this out.