More Lesbians Having Sex with Men
Ugh, seriously?! Another lesbian character that sleeps with men? And not any man - a nutter more than twice her age?! Come on! And just because he's famous? This is offensive on so many levels.
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > The Humbling (2015) Discussion > More Lesbians Having Sex with Men
"Another lesbian character that sleeps with men?"
Happens a lot
"And not any man - a nutter more than twice her age?! Come on! And just because he's famous?"
Happens a lot
"This is offensive on so many levels."
Not really. It actually happens, how is it offensive? it COULD be offensive in how it's played but the premise itself isn't at all.
By definition, the character should be referred to as a bisexual, then.
Since I always associated homosexuality with, you know, being attracted to only your gender, and for heteros like me, vice versa.
Mind you, I wouldn't exactly be cheerful if they made a biopic with me sleeping with Al Pacino.
"Mind you, I wouldn't exactly be cheerful if they made a biopic with me sleeping with Al Pacino."
😊
Well...... Another thing to mention is that seeing some of the reviews of this movie on many lesbians sites, they have been, understandably, VERY negative. Basically the comments left by the users (who are all lesbians) have been many and they've all said the same thing, "I think I just vomited in my mouth reading about this movie", "this movie sounds disgusting and homophobic", "thank you for writing this review and sparing me the thought of ever laying my eyes on this film, "what an offensive piece of crap this is!" Those are just a few of the comments left on those websites about this film. Any many that are very similar to that. In other words, for almost all lesbians (or at least MOST) this film is nothing but an abomination and is NOT accurate of gay women, and in general gay women would NEVER do what her character did. Then again, I'm not surprised by the film either, since the book and the film was written and directed by men. Straight men. The type of straight men who are very chauvinistic and want to live out some sort of delusional fantasy that they know would never happen. I have only seen a small handful of gay male characters who have slept with women, but not as much as the other way around, and that is just as offensive.
I'm just surprised that none of the cast or crew thought that the movie was so homophobic and disrespectful toward gay women, why would they agree to be a part of it? Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman? So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women. Basically the idea that homosexual women don't actually exist, and it will continue to make chauvinistic men feel very smug about that, and then queer women will continue to not be taken seriously. And to some extent bisexual men and women, since for some reason they couldn't make her character that way, even though she should have!
So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women
Great point. Also, she had a strange obsession with Pacino, she wasn't bisexual, she was a lesbian and was only with one man (Pacino) because she's been fond of him since she was a child. Bisexual technically means she would be attracted to women AND men, but the character wasn't attracted to men, she even breaks up with her ex-girlfriend for the sole reason that her ex was transitioning to become a man.
It happened with Chasing Amy too, this whole *lesbian breaks her sexual orientation for the man because he's "the one"* thing, which is cute, but I never recall seeing a film/show where the gender was reversed, and a gay man fell in love with a woman, except that http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120772/ jennifer aniston movie.
I have to admit though I still loved THe Humbling, as well as Chasing Amy, though that whole thing does make me uncomfortable, flexible sexuality FOR the male character because he is THAT great. It is chauvinist, but I feel writers don't even realize because it's instilled. I guess if Greta Gerwig's character was straight, we'd complain there is no gay representation, at least it's representation instead of a slew of heterosexuals onscreen (every single damn movie), and the portrayal of the lesbians is not stereotypical here. share
Yes darkmage you are right. Pretty much any person that is homosexual would only want to be sexual with people of the same sex, just like heteros only want to be sexual with the opposite sex. Although VERY FEW men and women can be sexually fluid, the vast majority of men and women are not. So this film is very insulting.
Another thing to mention is that seeing some of the reviews of this movie on many lesbians sites, they have been, understandably, VERY negative. Basically the comments left by the users (who are all lesbians) have been many and they've all said the same thing, "I think I just vomited in my mouth reading about this movie", "this movie sounds disgusting and homophobic", "thank you for writing this review and sparing me the thought of ever laying my eyes on this film, "what an offensive piece of crap this is!" Those are just a few of the comments left on those websites about this film. Any many that are very similar to that. In other words, for almost all lesbians (or at least MOST) this film is nothing but an abomination and is NOT accurate of gay women, and in general gay women would NEVER do what her character did. Then again, I'm not surprised by the film either, since the book and the film was written and directed by men. Straight men. The type of straight men who are very chauvinistic and want to live out some sort of delusional fantasy that they know would never happen. I have only seen a small handful of gay male characters who have slept with women, but not as much as the other way around, and that is just as offensive.
I'm just surprised that none of the cast or crew thought that the movie was so homophobic and disrespectful toward gay women, why would they agree to be a part of it? Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman? So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women. Basically the idea that homosexual women don't actually exist, and it will continue to make chauvinistic men feel very smug about that, and then queer women will continue to not be taken seriously. And to some extent bisexual men and women, since for some reason they couldn't make her character that way, even though she should have!
The film actually has a logical and realistic explanation for this.
sharePacinoyes, no it does not happen "a lot". It is actually VERY RARE. And some gay men have done the same thing to. But the truth is, the vast majority of gays and lesbians would NEVER do anything sexual with the opposite sex, they only like the same sex. And that will never change. Those women that you describe is bisexual. And I'm pretty sure the op is from the queer community and that's why they are upset.
shareWell even if it is "very rare" - the fact is it does happen, so why can't there be a movie about it happening? I know in my personal life several females that identified as lesbian at some point in their lives and not at others.
I haven't seen the film yet, but I did read the book and in the book it's clear that her infatuation with the older man isn't random - she crushed on him as a young girl.
I am pretty sure the OP is from the queer community too but I don't think they have a right to really be upset - unless the film treats the relationship in an offensive way. The premise isn't offensive at all though.
No more so than if you showed a film about a straight man indulging in a non-straight relationship.
You have to grant human beings the right to exists outside of the labels and behave outside of the labels too - self-identified or not.
As someone who grew up in the NYC area and lived in Chelsea for several years in my teens, I have known or at least met a few women who claimed to be lesbian, especially in the late teen's/early 20's period of life, who ended up going to (or back to) men exclusively. Female sexuality is just more fluid than that of males, it's not an opinion it's a fact and has to do with how the entire arousal/attraction process differs in male vs female brains (it's quite common for young girls to mistake intense friendships in early adolescence for sexual attraction), and while I'm sure 98% of lesbians don't switch teams, I don't think I've EVER heard of or met a gay man who went to women exclusively. My point - is that it DOES happen, especially in women who were confused early in adolescence and just latched on to what felt right. As long as it's portrayed respectfully and doesn't get preachy I don't see what the problem is? Even if it wasn't done tastefully, it's just a stupid movie anyway, not state mandated viewing.
shareWell jasonkone your statement would still be quite controversial, especially for gay women. I've actually been around the queer community for years being queer myself and I can honestly say that there are TONS of gay women who find the idea of sexual fluidity to be very insulting. If not, then almost all of them would be insulted. A lot of those women don't even think it exists actually. Although believe it or not I have seen at least one or two men who claimed to be gay and yet went for a woman some time in their life. There have been more studies lately showing that perhaps brain activity among men and women is not so different after all. BUT sexual fluidity among men and women is still rare, VERY few people are. And the vast majority of men and women are not. So MOST gays and lesbians would never want to do anything sexual with people of the opposite sex. They are born and hard-wired not to be into that.
Another thing to mention is that seeing some of the reviews of this movie on many lesbians sites, they have been, understandably, VERY negative. Basically the comments left by the users (who are all lesbians) have been many and they've all said the same thing, "I think I just vomited in my mouth reading about this movie", "this movie sounds disgusting and homophobic", "thank you for writing this review and sparing me the thought of ever laying my eyes on this film, "what an offensive piece of crap this is!" Those are just a few of the comments left on those websites about this film. Any many that are very similar to that. In other words, for almost all lesbians (or at least MOST) this film is nothing but an abomination and is NOT accurate of gay women, and in general gay women would NEVER do what her character did. Then again, I'm not surprised by the film either, since the book and the film was written and directed by men. Straight men. The type of straight men who are very chauvinistic and want to live out some sort of delusional fantasy that they know would never happen. I have only seen a small handful of gay male characters who have slept with women, but not as much as the other way around, and that is just as offensive.
I'm just surprised that none of the cast or crew thought that the movie was so homophobic and disrespectful toward gay women, why would they agree to be a part of it? Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman? So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women. Basically the idea that homosexual women don't actually exist, and it will continue to make chauvinistic men feel very smug about that, and then queer women will continue to not be taken seriously. And to some extent bisexual men and women, since for some reason they couldn't make her character that way, even though she should have!
Lastly, for the most part, the studies done on arousal and attraction are actually measured through vaginal flow not clitoral stimulation, which is where true arousal comes from. And the fact that it's vaginal flowing could in fact be fear and disgust. Not being turned on. And if they are turned on, it's not because of the people themselves; it's only what they are doing that's considered a "turn on". The act of sex turns some people on, but not the actual subjects involved.
"Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman?"
But the book makes it clear that it isn't random - that she's reverting back to her first crush - he knew her parents, she met him as a child, he was famous, she was fascinated. I haven't seen the film but I assume it's structured the same way.........She reverts back to her "simplest" time because what she's going through in her life is complicated at the moment.
The book takes some effort to explain the "why" and perhaps the film does too(?)
"I can honestly say that there are TONS of gay women who find the idea of sexual fluidity to be very insulting."
Whoa, whoa whoa.... back the train up here!!! Insulting to who??? ANY gay person, man or woman, who is insulted by anyone else's sexuality no matter what that may be is a hypocrite. Same goes for hetero or bi people. A person's sexuality is no one's business but that person.
"Lastly, for the most part, the studies done on arousal and attraction are actually measured through vaginal flow not clitoral stimulation, which is where true arousal comes from."
You may want to do some more research before continuing your participation in this discussion, or any other discussion related to human sexuality, otherwise you are going to come off as an uneducated fool.
There is a lot more to sexual research than genital stimulation or physical arousal. Attraction and arousal are measured using many physiological and cognitive attributes. Heart rate, blood flow, brain wave activity, skin temperature, ocular activity, chemical reactions in the body and brain...... Anyone who believes that genital state is the measurement of sexual arousal needs to come out of the stone age and look at more recent research.
You heterophobes crack me up. No ONE and no FILM has any obligation to be 'respectful' to gay women, or any other group, for that matter.
Lighten the hell up.
Lesbians are just afraid of the penis, it's an unstable phobia because the penis is actually very friendly; gays' excessive enthusiasm for the penis is, on the other hand, sustainable. Nobody has very strong feelings for the vagina
shareI disagree Timlin. I have very strong feelings for the vagina... I love the vagina, it's a very warm and wonderful thing once you get to know it.
shareLesbians love the vagina only just like gay men only love the penis. Homosexual people are only attracted to the same sex.
Another thing to mention is that seeing some of the reviews of this movie on many lesbians sites, they have been, understandably, VERY negative. Basically the comments left by the users (who are all lesbians) have been many and they've all said the same thing, "I think I just vomited in my mouth reading about this movie", "this movie sounds disgusting and homophobic", "thank you for writing this review and sparing me the thought of ever laying my eyes on this film, "what an offensive piece of crap this is!" Those are just a few of the comments left on those websites about this film. Any many that are very similar to that. In other words, for almost all lesbians (or at least MOST) this film is nothing but an abomination and is NOT accurate of gay women, and in general gay women would NEVER do what her character did. Then again, I'm not surprised by the film either, since the book and the film was written and directed by men. Straight men. The type of straight men who are very chauvinistic and want to live out some sort of delusional fantasy that they know would never happen. I have only seen a small handful of gay male characters who have slept with women, but not as much as the other way around, and that is just as offensive.
I'm just surprised that none of the cast or crew thought that the movie was so homophobic and disrespectful toward gay women, why would they agree to be a part of it? Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman? So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women. Basically the idea that homosexual women don't actually exist, and it will continue to make chauvinistic men feel very smug about that, and then queer women will continue to not be taken seriously. And to some extent bisexual men and women, since for some reason they couldn't make her character that way, even though she should have!
Hoo-rah!!!!!
They bid me take my place among them In the halls of Valhalla, where the brave may live forever.
No timlin, lesbians are not attracted to the penis at all. Just like gay men are not attracted to the vagina. Lesbians LOVE the vagina just like gay men love the penis. There is equal enthusiasm and strong feelings for both penises and vagina's. Homosexual people are NOT attracted to the opposite sex, when will people understand that.
Another thing to mention is that seeing some of the reviews of this movie on many lesbians sites, they have been, understandably, VERY negative. Basically the comments left by the users (who are all lesbians) have been many and they've all said the same thing, "I think I just vomited in my mouth reading about this movie", "this movie sounds disgusting and homophobic", "thank you for writing this review and sparing me the thought of ever laying my eyes on this film, "what an offensive piece of crap this is!" Those are just a few of the comments left on those websites about this film. Any many that are very similar to that. In other words, for almost all lesbians (or at least MOST) this film is nothing but an abomination and is NOT accurate of gay women, and in general gay women would NEVER do what her character did. Then again, I'm not surprised by the film either, since the book and the film was written and directed by men. Straight men. The type of straight men who are very chauvinistic and want to live out some sort of delusional fantasy that they know would never happen. I have only seen a small handful of gay male characters who have slept with women, but not as much as the other way around, and that is just as offensive.
I'm just surprised that none of the cast or crew thought that the movie was so homophobic and disrespectful toward gay women, why would they agree to be a part of it? Would this movie (or the book that it's based on), be just as "interesting" to the general public if the genders were switched? About a gay man who randomly has sex with an older woman? So whether or not people think it's a so called "accurate" representation of SOME lesbians (and gay men), this movie is still terrible because for some people they are truly going to think that this represents ALL gay women. Basically the idea that homosexual women don't actually exist, and it will continue to make chauvinistic men feel very smug about that, and then queer women will continue to not be taken seriously. And to some extent bisexual men and women, since for some reason they couldn't make her character that way, even though she should have!
[deleted]
You envy is showing Jon. You obviously don't know much about Al Pacino. Beverly D'Angelo, Diane Keaton, Jill Clayburgh, and Marthe Keller are pretty high caliber and classy women all of which Pacino has had long relationships with.
You do realize these actors you mentioned, for the most part, don't write the movies they star in and are not the casting directors or producers of most of the movies they star in right?
And just to overall add to this thread, I agree with the op. This movie was just disgusting and insulting on many different levels. Her character should have been portrayed as bisexual, not a lesbian! And I guarantee pretty much any gay woman who comes across this movie would be absolutely disgusted by this film. The whole thing is VERY inaccurate. They are sick and tired of this idiotic trope being used in film and tv.
And from the MANY websites I've come across, TONS of lesbians are showing their disgust at it.
It is almost as if men find it the ultimate male ego-boost to have a lesbian woman wanting to have sex with them. Roth is fully aware of the difference between a bisexual and a lesbian. He made her a lesbian just because it is the ultimate compliment.....in a male fantasy world. As written many times before in this thread, lesbians are sexually attracted to women....NOT men. Even sexy, handsome, old, famous, has-been actors. In the book, this is supposed to be the first man she has ever had sex with and ofc was very unexperienced. Uuuuggghhhh.....so distasteful.
shareExactly indieflickers. Pretty much every lesbian that's come across this movie has expressed their absolute disgust at it. I've only seen a handful of films with gay male characters who have done the same with women, but for some reason the other way around is WAY more prominent. Too prominent. It is atrocious indeed. This movie was just plain offensive and inaccurate. Gay women would NEVER do what she did. She should have been portrayed as bisexual. Better visibility for bi guys and gals.
shareThough seemingly rare, gay people do occasionally have sexual relations with the opposite sex. Get over it. Is this film a backlash against gay empowerment? Who really cares? Gay women apparently. With all the gender politics and confusion out there, anything goes. So why not this? Hardly groundbreaking and certainly not worth all the enmity. A heterosexual has the nerve, the audacity to act out within their life's framework? We should all cry for all the offended gays utterly distraught at having been forced to watch this film. I'd lay a safe bet that most of the outrage is from people that have not even viewed the film. Get over your choice, your being, your attitude or whatever makes you so mad. Want fun angry ladies? Watch Julia. There. Feel better now? No? Get over it, move on. In no way to I condone sexual abuse of any kind. But physical revenge, or any manifestation of anger that harms another, is hypocrisy at it's finest hours.
On a similar note, why not be annoyed at the prevalence in modern, so-called family animation endeavors that categorically characterize men as either evil or bumbling(weak), but lovable...and portray women as strong and visionary, however flawed by the evil patriarch. With no gray areas. Ahem, Disney. Like it's all gonna become magically egalitarian after a few decades of awakening. Awareness is awesome, while gender politics can be downright cruel and unforgiving. Genetics are hard-wired, Hollywood and media outlets are as transient and fickle as a breeze on ANY given day. How many sexual orientations result from trauma? Or the break-up of marriages and struggling identity? Also traumatic. As a father, I'm forever trying to let my kids be themselves while letting them know that there are many media predators out there trying to get their vote at any cost. The pen has become mightier than the sword in a true sense. Just watch ANY news outlet. Writers mind what you do and say with the freedoms granted you. It's not a mosh pit, it's a planet struggling as much as do it's youth. Congratulations, btw, feminists. You now have as much to answer to as the alleged constructs you so unblinkingly abhor.
While others starve to death, the genderists march on, somehow feeling they know what's best for all. Men animals, women saints. *beep* that noise. Kids need balance so they can walk upright and lead to better ways and ideas. Get off their backs about gender. That's easy for most to figure out on their own. We're past that. Try economics and the politics of power. Dividing families is just stupid and distracting us from the real problem of wealth and entitlement. Though dividing households is money in the bank for producers of ALL kinds. Go money!!!