Albion's Seedlings: Swishing chaps in the high chapparel

November 09, 2005

Swishing chaps in the high chapparel

The destructive lefties are at it again.

Now the heritage of the West and Wyoming is to be shoe-horned into the liberal agenda. Forget Gary Cooper. Forget Shane. Forget John Wayne. Forget, even, the Deadwood stage and Doris Day. Who’d a thunk it, but while the Beatles were taking the world by storm and the world was agog at the miniskirt and Carnaby Street, according to Hollywood, there were two cowboys in 1960s Wyoming who were fighting their secret desire for one another.

They couldn’t set it much later than the 1960s because otherwise, the two cowboys would have been drinking latte and exchanging ironing tips on getting sharp pleats in their chaps.

Needless to say, the folks in Wyoming are not pleased – not because the film deals with homosexuality, but because it is a lie. Wyoming residents say they have never heard of a gay cowboy, there’s no hint of such in the state’s folklore and the cowboys themselves say they’ve never heard tell of one either. The locals are saying, “Don’t trash our heritage,” but it’s tipped to win an Academy award. The New York Daily News’s Jack Matthews opined that the movie may be too much for the red state audiences, but “would give the liberal-leaning academy a great chance to stick its thumb in conservatives’ eyes.”

Precisely. Not honest entertainment, but malice.

According to London’s Telegraph, the film has attracted rave reviews, with some critics praising as brave the "abundant nudity and explicit love scenes".

Sounds like a real snooze-fest.

Posted by Verity at November 9, 2005 10:51 AM

Comments

Explicit love scenes! Yes!

[a dusty saloon]

Slim: Hello, Tex.

Tex: Hello, Slim.

Slim: Is that a six-shooter in your Levis or are you just happy to see me?

Tex: Trigger and I are getting hitched, now that the governor has signed the new domestic-animals partnership act. But why don't we go back to my pickup and have some frozen margaritas for old times' sake?

[etc.]

Posted by: Jonathan at November 9, 2005 12:14 PM

Jonathan is in the wrong line of work. You could make a fortune with that stuff.

Posted by: Lex at November 9, 2005 12:50 PM

... "Wyoming residents say they have never heard of a gay cowboy, there’s no hint of such in the state’s folklore and the cowboys themselves say they’ve never heard tell of one either."

The above statement is so stupid as to be beyond incredulity. Added to the fact that the movie is set in the 1960's...not the 1890's. By the 1960's there were probably gay bars in Wyoming, no less "gay" cowboys. But, what can you expect from certain loud-mouths in a state where they tie gay men to fences, beat them 'til nearly-dead then leave them to die of exposure?

Shameful.

Posted by: Ted B. at November 9, 2005 01:28 PM

Ted B - There have always been gay everything throughout history. My post was about the exploitative, publicity seeking, mean-spirited film makers. Not the fact that homosexuality has been a thread running through the human race forever.

Posted by: Verity at November 9, 2005 03:57 PM

Hi ho, Silver away...step into tomorrow today..

Posted by: Soreheaduk at November 10, 2005 02:25 AM

"Wyoming residents say they have never heard of a gay cowboy, there’s no hint of such in the state’s folklore and the cowboys themselves say they’ve never heard tell of one either."

So that guy in the Village People was from some other State then?

Posted by: Tim Worstall at November 10, 2005 04:36 AM

Well, given that there have been seven or eight replacements since the original group, there's a good chance one of them might indeed have been from Wyoming.

Posted by: Verity at November 10, 2005 07:07 AM

=> Shameful is the correct word for this!

Posted by: silvia at November 12, 2005 09:37 AM

Um...I don't understand what these words mean:

"....exploitative, publicity seeking, mean-spirited film makers."

"exploitative"---meaningless word, usually used by Lefties griping about 3rd world sweatshops.

"publicity-seeking"--where is the shame in trying to get publicity? I mean, bloggers and Shakespeare alike have tried to get publicity for their creations...no shame in that, right?

"mean-spirited"--this is the kind of line that Lefties used against the Right until it became a punchline. It's usually used when you can't find anything really "mean" that the person said, so you just say that their heart is bad. But who cares about whether people's hearts are pure when they are creating art? If the art's good, it's good, and if it's bad, it's bad, regardless of the purity of people's hearts.

This is a great blog. I don't see a need to clog it up with stuff like this.

And here's a possible explanation for why the movie might work:

Love stories need tension, and in a world where the inter-family tensions of Romeo and Juliet only work today as a gang-related tale, an artist has to dig deep to create a plausible barrier to love.

I expect to see many more gay love stories in the coming century, some good, some bad, but all driven--creatively and commercially--by the need to give the characters some kind of hurdle to o'erleap.

Posted by: Garett at November 12, 2005 03:09 PM

Coming soon, to a theater near you: "Romeo and Julian!"

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at November 22, 2005 05:07 PM

Once again, pearls of wisdom from South Park's own Eric Cartman:

"Naw dude, Independent films are those black and white hippy movies. They're always about gay cowboys eating pudding"

Posted by: JP Gibb at November 22, 2005 09:17 PM

Who cares? Enjoyed your blog until this post. Ciao.

Posted by: Mark at December 17, 2005 04:42 PM

xv4
2dy
d8q
qv8
pfz
gps
s3l
5ug
6mb
o97
tmi
wbz
wxf
bbp
q1x
4zd
w8u
3da
ktc
aig
34j
c9o
8le
ds6
wno
uot
uvx
z0i
bpw
wez