An Ex Gay said (January 31, 2006):

In advance, I had concluded that the movie would advance some important moral claims about homosexual freedom, and that those pretensions would dovetail with conventional views of moral equivalency between lifestyles. I wanted to see if it was honest or not. As it turned out, the answers were "yes" and "no."

Where did it faithfully represent reality? I think in these respects:

1. It makes sense that two horny young men out in the wilderness with a lot of time on their hands might fall into sexual exploration.

2. As it followed the lives of the characters, it rang true that they would for the most part return to regular, heterosexual relationships. Most studies of same-sex behaviour confirm that a lot of people who dabble in the gay lifestyle--for whatever reason, a temporary thrill or curiousity--do that for a very brief time and never consider it again.

3. It honestly depicted the norm of tom-cat gay behaviour in the further adventures of the Jack Twist character, who sought and was sought out for further homosexual trysts with other people.

Where did it stray from the truth? I think in these ways:

1. The pattern of these two cowboys returning for regular visits because they are in "love," as the script clearly implies, is completely unknown to me in my own experience of gay behaviour and the gay culture. I think the film-makers wanted to convey homosexuality as "normal," and by implying that these chaps would engage in this sort of romantic longing for each other, just like any other lovers separated by fate, they would capture that value. That essentially turns the movie into propaganda.

I found myself comparing it, for example, to "My Private Idaho," where the lead characters did have a strong emotional bond, but one that only applied to the short space of time where their lives were interconnected. Afterwards, one died and the other went on his merry way. The idea that gay lovers somehow extend their longing over a period of years is, I suppose, possible. But I've never heard of it or seen it.

2. The character of Ennis's wife also rings false. It is highly implausible that a woman would see her husband making a pass at another man and not kick up a fuss about it, right there and then. Since both he and his wife were from a conventional, religious background, in the real world this would immediately have prompted a harsh, negative reaction. I've seen wives suffer in silence based on rumours and speculation about their mates, but never a case where they witnessed the infidelity and then stayed silent about it for years.

3. The anguish of the Ennis character, and his guilt about his relationship with Twist, is presented in a confused manner. The movie leads you to believe that he is suffering because he couldn't find it in himself to face up to his identity. But it also implied what is more likely to be real, that it was the social taboos about homosexuality that were causing his moral dilemma. Could both be true? I suppose, but it rings truer to me that he is feeling guilty because he committed those acts, not because he misses his paramour.

So, in terms of the moral honesty of the film, I conclude that it has some, but not nearly enough. A more honest rendition of the psychological dynamics of homosexuals can be found in the TV series "Queer as Folk," which portrays the lifestyle warts and all, and doesn't pretend to symbolize such pretensions as star-crossed lovers as part of the plot. It's "wham, bam, thank you, (not) ma'am." That's what mostly goes on in the real world.

The fundamental problem with "Brokeback Mountain" is that it uses a heterosexual template to describe a long-term relationship that is not only the exception in the gay culture, but almost unheard of. It also takes as its underlying theme that homosexual identity is locked in, which I know from personal experience to be false. I found out the hard way that, like all other human behaviours, homosexuality is a chosen pursuit, not a Twist of fate.

Chris said (January 26, 2006):

Being a homosexual, I have been reading your writing with much interest. You would be surprised at how much I agree with you about the distortion of society. Certainly Hugh Hefner has contributed much to cause changes in society that are unhealthy and yet seemed to make sense at the time. The reason his ideas gained a following is because be was fighting the conformist, narrow minded, tightly structured society of the 50's.

Most men are naturally repulsed by homosexuality and only about 2% of the population are gay as far as I know. I had a terrible time accepting my gayness, have never had a gay relationship, and struggled to conform with society clear into my 50's with the false hope that I would somehow fall in love and marry a woman. I can never move back to my small hometown because I would be ostricized and fear for my safey.

You are very clear and accurate about how society has been altered and how men and women have to return to their old, natural way of relating. However, very little of the social distortion is actually due to homosexuality. It is absurd to think that gays can influence society to be more gay.
-----

Chris,

Thanks. We disagree. It is not homosexuals but homosexual activists sponsored by the Rockefeller
social engineers, gender feminists and the media who have a major influence on making more people experiment with homosexuality and adopt jomosexual patterns.

henry

Chris said (January 26, 2006):

Being a homosexual, I have been reading your writing with much interest. You would be surprised at how much I agree with you about the distortion of society. Certainly Hugh Hefner has contributed much to cause changes in society that are unhealthy and yet seemed to make sense at the time. The reason his ideas gained a following is because be was fighting the conformist, narrow minded, tightly structured society of the 50's.

Most men are naturally repulsed by homosexuality and only about 2% of the population are gay as far as I know. I had a terrible time accepting my gayness, have never had a gay relationship, and struggled to conform with society clear into my 50's with the false hope that I would somehow fall in love and marry a woman. I can never move back to my small hometown because I would be ostricized and fear for my safey.

You are very clear and accurate about how society has been altered and how men and women have to return to their old, natural way of relating. However, very little of the social distortion is actually due to homosexuality. It is absurd to think that gays can influence society to be more gay.

Feroz from Riyadh said (January 25, 2006):

Your pen might creat a revolution, bring the misguided folk to the right path and it will not go unrewarded by God or Allah whom you believe.

May I urge you draw an Action Plan apart from writing campaign to create an alternate climate against their satanic arrangements (those you have mentioned in your articles) where one can specially the women folk can raise their moral and find economic emanicpation.

Waiting to see more feedback and informative article. With warm regards and personal esteem

Carolyn said (January 25, 2006):

I am a 44 year old woman from the Great State of Maine. I am writing to tell you how much i appreciate what you have to say.

Your common sense mirrors my own and as a result of what you write.,i have found that i am much better able to accept how i really feel and ignore what The World tries so desperately to sell. Growing up in the 70's was a confusing time and i always had a vague unease about my femininity and my relationships. It if funny i know ,but after reading your articles, i have a much better sense of what i am supposed to be doing as a woman at this stage of my life. No more striving for the unattainable and you have helped me to grow up and my marriage is improved.

So thanks a lot. You are a very brave Man.
P.S. Today i saw for the very first time, a t.v. ad for home financing featuring among the happy new homeowners, a homosexual couple...... We People of Faith are in a heap of trouble and are waking up too late to save this country, i fear

Patrick said (January 23, 2006):

For any straight male it is not easy to watch to males kiss, fondled and screw each other and also be in loved on the silver screen. I too felt
discomfort but why ? Because like millions I too was brainwashed by my religious Catholic up bringing and traditional society institutions that it was a sin since childhood.

To me this film depicts that homosexuals today no longer must play the game and be forced in pretending in being straight like in the past by getting married while proving their manhood in having kids while leading a double life which can lead to destruction and so many hardship.

Films like this in today's world are a blessing and teach that homosexual genetic make up cannot be tossed away or put on a back burner. It is very present and you cannot hide from your original genetic make up. It is part
of life and it is part of nature and if there is a God he created you that way.

At yesterday's screening I was surprise to see parents with young kids that is boys and girls aged 10 to 14. I was amazed how they reacted, enjoyed the film and understood all of its implications. To them watching two men kiss
and copulated was far from being a problem and a big deal. I was surprise how they could easily grasp and understand this whole film and not be shy about it and this in front of their parents.

The parody of it all is that 40 years a go a father would bring is two boys to watch a homosexual being lynched of have his nuts cut off. Now in today's world both parents bring their offspring to view this film and all can
celebrate the diversity of differences. And while I was leaving watching and
listening to grand mothers, grand fathers, straight couples, comments on how
they enjoyed the film I was still shock at how times at change.

The only remorse I felt was pity for the wives because just like their respective husbands they were victims of religious and society intolerance and did not deserve to be treated in such way.

Those two homosexuals lovers where victims of the ignorance of the times and
had no choice that covering up. Maybe in marriage they thought they could
masked for ever the homosexual impulses but just like millions of other such
marriages around the world this was an illusion.

This film is an eye opener and far from your words........... Homosexuality
is a developmental disorder that the Illuminati wish to foster in order to
destabilize and depopulate society............. this film teaches that
homosexuality is normal and instead of behaving into a self-destructive life
one as to be a man or a woman and accept their sexual orientation without
fear of being chastised and outcast.

---

Thanks Patrick,

You make my point more effectively than i could.

henry

Tina said (January 23, 2006):

In response to your recent article.

1. You know what Henry, I have read some of the emails posted on your website regarding homosexuality and one thing that sticks out from the homosexual community is the denial of their choice they have made.

2. Each and every homosexual that I know personally all had no relationship with their fathers. Each and every one of those homosexuals that I know were all over babied by their mothers and were completely ignored by their fathers.

3. No women can give her son what a father can and when a mother is the sole provider and caretaker, it only creates more unnecessary problems later in life, like for example the fear of intimacy.

3. There is also the fact that homosexuality is considered a sexual addiction, as homosexuality has nothing to do with love but everything to do with sex.

3. What about the fact that the homosexual sexual act is unhealthy too. I had read sometime ago in a book on Taoist that the sexual act of two men together is very unhealthy and deadly. The homosexuals who do live a long life would most likely not have had much anal sex. The damage that homosexuals do to their bodies is irreparable.

4. Now, the homosexuals are comfortable with being a group a minority because the Court decided they were a minority group. Fact is, the Court enables anyone with any addictions. Canada is a country without morals and any values.

5. Certainly we should be treated with respect and this includes homosexuals but that does not mean we must enable homosexuals in their addiction by agreeing with their conduct.

Finally, the issue of homosexuality has nothing to do with homophobia but everything to do with a natural response to feeling repulsed. Men need to get back on track and seriously take their role seriously and stop acting irresponsibly otherwise Henry, there is not much hope for this civilization.

C said (January 23, 2006):

Henry, I agree with you that the family, religion, and the nation have been
targeted for destruction. And, that the film industry pushes certain themes
at the request of its owners. The recognition of three gay themed films at
the Golden Globe ceremony does not reflect the pulse of popular culture, but
merely another calculated tear in the social fabric of North America. But,
I have to disagree with your theme that homosexuality is disgusting. Its
promotion and increased acceptance may not be good for social order, but it
is certainly not innately disgusting.

Those who are disgusted ought to consider that they may be repressed
homosexuals. But, then again, if they are repressed homosexuals they
probably won't consider it at all.

Guy said (January 23, 2006):

As a non- effiminate gay male trying to survive in this testosterone-laden world as a minority group, I find it incredulous that you, as an educated person, believe that homosexuality would "explode" if father figures were removed at childhood.

What nonsense. Ask any gay person Mr Makow, ours is not a choice but something which was 'gifted' at or before birth. Who would want to choose the lonely & difficult path of growing up gay, in this world of stigmas which people like you perpetuate? My only understanding is that possibly we were given breath at this time to help stop the population explosion.

Your comments about homosexuality being an 'agenda' of sorts, is way off base. I only hope you don't have a gay son but if you did, then he would echo my sentiments. Do you know the origin of the word gay? I thought not, it comes from WW2 & stands for 'Good As You'.

Pete said (January 23, 2006):

Hmmm... Dr. Makow, your sensational and misrepresentational protrayal of homosexuality seems a little skewed...for example, was it the Illuminati that fostered homosexuality in ancient Greece? I think not. And isn't sex for it's own sake a predominantly male attitude, regardless of orientation? I think it is!
Also, your belief that homosexuallity is a result of alientation from the father figure at an early age is a joke. That is a fallacy (no pun intended). A full seventy-five percent of males in society would be homosexual if that were true. (a rough estimate). Your insistence in your own ignorance is repugnant. Heterosexual men seems to delight in waching two women get it on, and I know some heterosexual women find it stimlation to watch two men do the same. I think that would not be true if your assertions that straight people find homosexualty repugnant. It's mostly men who are not sure of, or not secure in, their own masculinity that feel threatened by male homosexuality.
I mean, like most ALL men who have a hard time being emotionally open, honest, and intimate with other men because their fathers and peers never modelled emotionally mature behavior for their children.
A mistake homosexual men often make is to get married before they accept their homosexuality, and the reason is that society does not support good gay male role modeling, and let young gay men know that being attracted to men is normal for gay men. Gay men find sex with women repugnant because of their nature, much as you say straight men find homosexualty repugnant. And lots of straight married men weem to want to have sex with other men besides! What do you make of that?
I'm sure you can twist everything I say to fit your own anti-homosexual agenda, as you seem to have a general knack for propoganda. And no, it's not "intolerant" to refer to the movie as "Pokeback Mount'in", it's just a cheap laugh, like all the late-night talk show hosts have been doing! Ha ha ha.
You don't have to go and see it if you choose not to. I am gay myself, but choose not to see it because it's a mushy yet violent love story. Personally, I like comedies, movies that make me laugh, like reading your ill-informed and ignorant morality diatribes agaist homosexuality. If you don't want to have sex with another man, that's your choice. Otherwise, how can you be considered an authority on the subject???
Stick to what you know ! Feel free to trumpet the virtues of heterosexual sex all you want, if that's what you believe is morally biologically correct. Most gay people know you are full of bullshit when it comes to your views of us. I do agree with some of your other political views, but you mix up a lot of lies in with the truth and come out with stuff that seems like stories from the National Enquirer about two-headed alien babies. Say, you've never fathered a two headed alien baby, why don't you write an article against other people having one? That makes as much sense as your drivel about homosexualty.
Sincerely Yours, Pete Lund Portland Maine
(Co-Founder of "the Companion", Portland, Maine's only gay/lesbian oriented newspaper.)
--------

Dear Pete,

On the cause of homosexuality I prefer to take the word of psychiatrists who have treated thousands than the word of homosexuals, who admit to a tendency to be in denial. These psychiatrists' conclusions can be found at www.narth.com

Like members of other "persecuted minorities," you cannot see anyone else' point of view even when you are not being attacked, and the survival of the species ultimately is at stake.

Henry

Deb said (January 23, 2006):

For a different twist on the homosexual agenda, check this out: http://watch-unto-prayer.org/aquarius.html.

It gives a whole new meaning to the 'Age of Aquarius'!

Rick said (January 23, 2006):

Great article on "Pokeback Mount'in." Many of the illuminati themselves have been warped in childhood, so they are just perpetuating their own distortions.

The basic propaganda is that people are born that way and can't change. When a Christian announces he been changed from a homosexual into a heterosexual, they go ballistic. Albert Ellis, the developer of Rational Psychology, took the approach that homesexuality is learned behavior than can be unlearned, and he developed a way to do it. He is one of many.

You may be a voice in the wilderness, but these voices add up.

David said (January 22, 2006):

I absolutely agree with your take on this film. Strictly, 100%, a tool of the zionist controlled whore entertainment media, whose witting or otherwise goal is total enslavement and destruction of nationhood.

Vicious Vixen said (January 22, 2006):

You seem to profess to know so much about
homosexuality and how it works. How its "learned" or caused by abuse at an early age, etc. You have no idea what it means to be gay. Stop talking for people you know nothing about. Stop making gays out to be evil
and wrong and condemned in life to a sad fate. It is people like you who continue to promote such hate and vilification that makes it hard for gay men and women to fully respect themselves.

You like to appear to be so intelligent about how the "Big Bad Scary Boogey Man Illuminati" is after everyone. Why not offer to change the world than to bitch about it? You seem good at criticizing but then again its easier to write little intellectual articles and talk the talk rather than walk the walk.

And finally, why not focus where the real problems are: people who refuse to take responsibility in their lives and raising families. Oh no, it is easier to
blame the gays for your ill raised and screaming kids, your high divorce rates, your infidelity and obsession with material things. Once again, you want and in your logic, "the heterosexual male", wants to play the victim because some outside force is manipulating how you think, behave, and live. Oh hell, get off the
cross! Easier to play the victim or saint rather than take responsibility. Why not write more intellectual fluff on getting your sorry asses away from football on TV and spending more time with the kids?

Dan said (January 22, 2006):

Would be interesting to learn how this film was chosen to be promoted long and loud by all media, and ordained to sweep the Acadamy and other award venues. To my knowlege, no one has fully researched and documented how it happens, that a film of interest to less than 10% of the population is consistantly and heavily praised in every quarter of the media. I would compare it to other 'indie', limited interest films such as Werner Herzog's recent documentary on a man who lived with gorillas part of the year, only for he and his wife to have been killed by them, which was recorded on the man's tape recorder.
Limited interest films aren't big box office. That's just common sense. One would expect a film about displaced homosexuals living in cowboy country to show in 'art' theaters, and not become a household phrase.

Andy Warhol said anybody could be made into a star simply by being run through the promotion process....doesn't matter who they are or how ugly or talentless. The same goes for ideas, or culture values, or 'de-values'.

Notice that the writers were careful that the children were also female--this is a gay-side story. The women are symbols of an oppressive, anti-hedonistic society, they bring family and responsibility with them.

What an odd film for the 90% of the population that isn't gay to spend money to see. PT Barnum is still right. "There's a sucker born every minute".

Tony said (January 22, 2006):

Henry, I guess it's technically correct to call homosexuality a
"development disorder" but in almost every case it's a LEARNED
disorder. Learned from someone else. Usually at a young and vulnerable
age. That's why some who are willing to help individuals correct this
dysfunction are very often successful. It's simply not normal nor
natural. Arguments to the contrary are a lot like arguments for
evolution - constantly changing, searching and stretching another
ridiculous step beyond plausibility each time they are destroyed by
plain logic and honest reason.

Judges who allow homos and lesbians to adopt kids should be hung from
the nearest lamp post or convenient tree forthwith. They obviously have
no real judgment abilities. Or are agents of the queer community.
Either way, they are a worse pox on society than the queers.

Josh said (January 22, 2006):

just read your article on Pokeback Mount'in.
Spot-on, as usual. Better be careful, you might end up making a reputation for yourself! I don't know if you've seen any of the internet ads pushing the follow-up to Pokeback Mount'in. This one explores the lesbian side. It's called Imagine Me & You, and instead of cowboys, this one features a bride at her wedding who falls in love with another man's girlfriend, who is attending the wedding. Looking at it through my newly-trained perspective, it appears
that the subtle crashing of the wedding is a symbolic assault on heterosexual marriage (gee, who didn't see that one coming!?) and I foresee the substance portrayed tastefully enough that it won't be limited to adult movie theaters, allowing for as wide an audience as possible. The timing of this film seems too convenient, don't you think?

My shameless plug is for a training course I'm
undertaking to enhance my spirituality called Remote Viewing and Remote Influencing, created by one Gerald O'Donnell. Every training session I've undertaken from these people has left me feeling more refreshed, healed and energized than anything offered by the Illuminati. They're a non-profit organization, which makes them seem more credible. Everyone, from the brainy grade-school student to the stony-faced old geezer can and will benefit from this, since it is
everybody's Divine birthright. It all starts at
www.probablefuture.com.

Ian said (January 22, 2006):

Thankyou , again another totally truthful article. I have only seen the
trailer, and you are right. We are being brain washed. Well society is. It
is ridiculous. How things have changed since my parents grew up. I mean when
Elvis was first shown on the tv, he was only shown from the waist up ,
because it was considered too sexual. Now you have most pop stars looking
like lap dancers ( for example that Christina Agualera track 'Dirty' and the
whole thing is awful). Also , i may have even read this on your site , but
Madonna has been noted as saying on a few occasions over here is Britain,
that she doesn't let her children watch tele at all , especially because of
the sexual stuff on tv. I mean really have you seen her latest video. She is
47 and wairing NOTHING at all.
I mean even ones that claim to be chirstian , for example Beyonce Knowles do
not really help maters
My dad , who is not a devout man, says when he is on the runner in the gym,
he see's alll the latest music video's and is shocked. Imagine someone from
the 18th Century was transfered over to our time.
Hitler said , if he ever conquered Great Britain, he would use the strongest
drug known to man , Television to subvert the new conquered country.
I have worked with three gay guys in the last two years. An to be honest
they are either obsessed with sex and some of the more anal aspects and / or
they are very promiscious. I have been great friends with these chaps, but
some of their stories of, well i shan't say , have made me feel sick. My
wife doesn't even beleive these stories , koz she is quite old fashioned and
has led a sheltered life.

Well, thanks again. Please don't stop even if some are rude about what you
say.

Michelle said (January 22, 2006):

In reply to CY from Turkey [Below]..."Therefore it, , must be
treated just like thievery, adultery, rape, etc." Help for the 'patient', huh? Like, how about stoning, the pillory, dipped in boiling
oil! This is exactly the kind of thinking that promotes hatred and violence amongst ourselves. (An intended effect from the movie? And
what exactly are "schirephonics"?)

How, CY? Could someone like me be 'helped'? I am a woman, (1st strike), yet I was born male, (I know, in Turkey, and many other places,
folks like me are killed by our own families, but I'm lucky). It doesn't matter who I might be perceived as having sex with, I would be
queer either way in your eyes thus an incurable infidel. Incarceration? Torture? Firing Squad?

Yet, I live a wonderful and successful life that is filled with happiness, I am just as 'normal' as anyone else, so lay off! I don't need any 'treatment' or help from anyone, thank you.

Kurt said (January 21, 2006):

What is Hollywood going to do for a sequel to Brokeback Mountain, have the cowboys romancing the sheep? I think that if the queers would stay in the closet, no one would care what they did in private. It’s when they push it
in your face that people react. Perhaps though, all this may have a silver lining. Gays themselves claim they are predisposed to homosexuality because they are born that way. If it is genetic, then rather than society forcing
them into sham marriages where they manage to sire children to appear normal, we should allow them to ‘out’ and live their degenerate lifestyle. Ultimately, without reproducing, they will hit a genetic dead end.
---

Dear Kurt,

Except we don't accept the gentic excuse and Feminists are raising boys without fathers, so there is no genetic "dead end."

henry

Steve said (January 21, 2006):

Seems to me homosexuality's real danger is that it's a sidetrack issue designed by the PTB to obfuscate the real issue of the planet being turned into a police state.

Dear Steve,

Can't you see the connection between promoting homosexuality and bring in a police state?

henry

Glenn said (January 21, 2006):

Completely agree with you on "Pokeback Mountain" (I laughed like hell at that more accurate title). The people will never be able to see the forest, the damned trees are in the way, the trees of TV (the devil's eye), movies
like this, and "stars" like George Clooney (Looney is more like it), warping peoples minds until they accept that up is down and wrong is right. I'm reminded of the Aaron Tippin song "You've Got To Stand For Something...Or
You'll Fall For Anything".

Am I a perfect man? Are you? No, there is not one who does not fall short of the Glory of God. I have to remove the log in my own eye before I can point out others splinters, but that does NOT mean that evil should be
allowed to flourish unopposed. In that I agree with Peter1, people forget that Jesus did not say you have to forgive everyone all the time, but that the person ASKING for forgiveness must be forgiven, even 70 times 7 times a day, if he ASKS. Forgiving people who are consciously evil, refusing to recognise that their thoughts and actions are WRONG, must not be given
blanket forgiveness, even God himself demands that you ASK TO BE FORGIVEN, thereby recognizing in your own heart that you are thinking or doing
something that is wrong.

Henry, I thank God that I have finally found a place that explains the bible so I can finally understand it. It is a website maintained by a fellow named L. Ray Smith, at www.bible-truths.com. Take a gander, and let me know
what you think.

CY from Turkey said (January 21, 2006):

As you know I agree with most of the points in your article. The remaining part that I disagree with is the one about homosexuals who'd like to live their lives in peace. After acknowledging that homosexuality is a developmental disorder, why should then peaceful homosexual be left alone? By the same token should we let peaceful schirephonics or people with compulsive behaviour disorder live amongst us? They must be helped, encouraged for treatment. Otherwise how are you suggesting that they live? By isolating themselves totally? Or the opposite? None of these, even a life in between is the answer. Homosexuality is not only a disorder but also a sin. Therefore it must be treated just like thievery, adultery, rape, etc. In a healthy society it must be prohibited altogether with every help provided to the homosexual patients to heal.

Trish said (January 21, 2006):

Henry, I'm a member of the Screen Actors Guild, and accordingly, receive some of their publications, as well as promotional items sent specifically to members of SAG. This year, to date, the push for BEST FILM has been entirely for Brokeback Mountain, free ticket for SAG members etc.. no other film has been suggested for BEST FILM in the SAG awards strictly by promotion of freebies..