Friday, September 04, 2009

More LaBarbera lies and Know your lgbt history - Windows

Before I begin with this week's Know your lgbt history segment, I would like to point something out that caught my attention. If you want to skip it, then pan down to the Know Your LGBT History segment on Windows - the worst off-kilter lesbian movie I have ever seen.

At the National HIV Conference this week, the Centers for Disease Control said the following:

Gay and bisexual men account for half of new HIV infections in the U.S. and have AIDS at a rate more than 50 times greater than other groups. . .

. . . Gay and bisexual men account for half of new HIV infections in the U.S. and have AIDS at a rate more than 50 times greater than other groups, according to Centers for Disease Control & Prevention data presented at the National HIV Prevention Conference this week in Atlanta.


This is bad news to almost everyone except for our friend Peter LaBarbera, who naturally used this news for his own benefit:

The issue in this ongoing “culture war” is not the cause of homosexual “orientation” — or merely the legality of “same-sex marriage.” It’s homosexual behavior itself — and whether government should promote it or discourage it, or be neutral. I say discourage it, since the evidence keeps pouring in that conduct which has been proscribed as immoral down through centuries of Judeo-Christian tradition is also highly dangerous. Now if the CDC will only stop blabbering on about “homophobia” and start telling the truth — that the rectum is not a sexual organ, after all, and that we must take tough measures against “gay” promiscuity — America will become a healthier place.

Never mind that he shows his ignorance by taking in part of the CDC's statement and ignoring the part that doesn't suit his agenda.

The "blabbering about homophobia" that LaBarbera alludes to is this part of the article that he conveniently omitted in his attack on lgbts:

Many conference speakers, including ranking officials with the CDC, said getting rid of stigma, including homophobia, against those with HIV/AIDS is also a crucial part in reducing incident rates.

LaBarbera also omitted this part of the article:

( U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Kathleen) Sebelius also noted that gay and bisexual men, as well as African Americans and Latinos, continue to be hardest hit by the disease in the U.S. Steps are being taken by the Obama administration to target these populations specifically, she said.

“We’re targeting our efforts at high-risk groups like African Americans. Today, African Amer-icans make up just a tenth of the population. But they account for nearly half of new HIV infections. One in 30 African-American women will be diagnosed in her lifetime. One in 16 African-American men will be diagnosed with HIV. In 2005, the CDC reported that in five major cities, almost half of all African-American gay men were HIV positive. The situation is also dire for Latinos,” she said.

“Think about that. Imagine if it were half the straight white women in Atlanta. Wouldn’t we be calling this a national emergency? Shouldn’t we be?” she said to a cheering crowd.


I know LaBarbera wouldn't dare denigrate the Latino and African-American community for their unfortunate rate of HIV infections in the same manner that he denigrates the lgbt community. Not to worry, though. I'm sure enterprising racists will talk about the supposed "inferiority" of blacks and Latinos.

After all, you just can't keep hogs away from the trough, whether they be racists or homophobes.

Sorry about that for those expecting a Know your lgbt history segment. Now onto it . . .


Know your lgbt history - Windows

It has been said that Windows (1980) is such a bad movie that it will never make it to DVD. Hell, it's hard to find it on VHS.

And those who say these things are absolutely correct. I never thought it was possible to see a movie that simultaneously disgusted and bored me.

The repulsiveness starts off before you even have time to get acquainted with the characters.

Talia Shire plays a woman who is attacked when she is entering her apartment. The intruder makes her partly disrobe and, while holding a knife to her neck and mouth, makes her say "sounds" in a tape recorder.

The scene is disgusting. Why the intruder does this to her is even worse. He was paid by Shire's friend, played by Elizabeth Ashley, to make Shire do these things. She paid the man to commit the crime so that Shire would run to her for support. When this doesn't work, Ashley just listens to the tape of Shire's violation to the point where she can repeat the entire sequence by memory (and you just know that she will).

As you can guess, Ashley is secretly in love with Shire. When Shire moves to another apartment, Ashley commences to spy on her from telescope in a loft across the way.
As Shire slowly begins a romance with a detective investigating the case, Ashley begins to go insane, using a knife to "express herself" on Shire's cat, neighbor, and the psychiatrist who is starting to recognize her insane behavior.

First of all, what's with off-kilter women in movies? Why can't they just use a gun? Do they always have to attack people with knives. And not just any knife, but one of the long, slender knives that you just know was not made to cut meat.

Anyway, Windows was highly controversial. That and the fact that it was just a hideously made movie sunk its chances at the box office.

There is so much to dislike about this movie. For one thing, it just didn't make any sense. Ashley's character was rich, vivacious, and even has a sexy breezy way of talking.

Shire's character was meek, mousy, plain, and jumped at her own shadows. To make matters worse, Shire resurrected a bunch of those ugly berets she wore in Rocky.

Shouldn't it have been the other way around with Shire chasing after Ashley?

Secondly, the plotlines are dumb. The intruder who forces Shire to make all of those ugly sounds is caught because he is a cab driver and Shire just happens to be his fare later in the movie and recognizes his voice.

Thirdly, and maybe this isn't a bad thing, for a violent movie about a crazed lesbian who likes to get knife happy, we see almost no violence.

We know that Ashley is attacking people with her trusty knife because of reaction shots (although I saw the movie on youtube and maybe the poster excised the violent scenes).

At the very least, you would think to expect a knockdown, drag out fight between Shire and Ashley. It doesn't happen. All Ashley does is verbally repeat the sounds of Shire's violation until the police come. Meanwhile Shire just looks at her and wonders no doubt how in the hell did she get saddled in such a nasty movie.

The following are clips from Windows:



Now if you want to see the entire movie, you can go to the youtube file here.

But trust me when I say don't do it.

Past Know Your LGBT History postings:

Know your lgbt history - To Wong Foo and Priscilla

Know your lgbt history - Blazing Saddles

Know your lgbt history - Sanford and Son

Know your lgbt history - In Living Color

Know your lgbt history - Cleopatra Jones and her lesbian drug lords

Know your lgbt history - Norman, Is That You?

Know your lgbt history - The 'Exotic' Adrian Street

Know your lgbt history - The Choirboys

Know your lgbt history - Eddie Murphy

Know your lgbt history - The Killing of Sister George

Know your lgbt history - Hanna-Barbera cartoons pushes the 'gay agenda'

Know your lgbt history - Cruising

Know your lgbt history - Foxy Brown and Cleopatra Jones

Know your lgbt history - I Got Da Hook Up

Know your lgbt history - Fright Night

Know your lgbt history - Flowers of Evil

The Jeffersons and the transgender community



Bookmark and Share

5 comments :

Bill S said...

My memory of this movie is vague, and I really wanna keep it that way.
Hey, if you you want to complete the list of "Offensive Depictions of LGBT People In Crime Melodramas" (and after this and "Cruising", why not?), may I suggest the 1968 Frank Sinatra flick "The Detective"? Even for its day it's pretty horrible.

BlackTsunami said...

Ugh. you mean the movie where the gay guy with the ugly robe gets bashed in the head with the ugly ashtray?

Bill S said...

Yeah, among other things.
There's also the scene where Sinatra's character is interrogating a young gay man that has to be seen to be believed. It seems to imply that all gay men are psychotic.
And thanks to its being rerun on late-night tv a decade later, this was the FIRST movie depiction of gay people I saw after I realized I was gay. Nice, huh?

Anonymous said...

This was a much better movie when it was called "Play Misty For Me" and Ms. Ashley had her psycho sights on lesbian Clint Eastwood.

BlackTsunami said...

LOL. I saw that movie and actually that was Jessica Walters.

I hated what she did to maid. Luckily the maid lived after being shiska bobbed.