Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

The Neo-First Homosexuality Thread

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Pierrot le Fou, Jan 28, 2004.

  1. Pierrot le Fou

    Pierrot le Fou IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,391
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    The Neo-First Homosexuality Thread

    No, I do not mean that Neo from the Matrix is ***. Though I s'pose that could be discussed in this thread if it doesn't otherwise erupt into its previous bickering.

    We previously had the thread on the Constitutional ban on *** marriages going. I believe that IDuped, Gunn, Munch, and Steel were semi-duking it out at last notice.

    Summary so far:
    • Duped believes reproduction is the point of government sponsoring marriage.
    • *** people, save through mad science (is that a part of evil biology that Ashcroft mentioned?), can't have kids, so according to Duped, marriage is not the duty of the state to provide them.
    • Munch was arguing the Constitutionality of the 14th amendment's equal protection clause through various other amendments preventing discrimination on the basis of race, age, gender and whatnot, arguing that sexual orientation is covered by the 14th.
    • Gunn's point I totally forgot. I know I didn't like it.
    • My point was that all parties are working from different basic axioms, and this causes a bit of misunderstanding.

    I'm sure someone previously involved feels like starting this stuff up again, so have at it on all homosexual-issues, marriage or otherwise.
     
  2. AeroJonesy

    AeroJonesy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    12,940
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    467
    I don't think it'd matter whether or not I was for or against *** marriage. Changing the Constution to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman is a scary thing. I don't really see the need to change the Constitution at all, especially not to add an extra (relatively) trivial clause. We didn't try and put slavery in the Constitution did we?

    Let's not just go around amending it.
     
  3. TurdFergusen

    TurdFergusen Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Man, that Neo guy was SO ***...
     
  4. Ash Housewares

    Ash Housewares IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    21,802
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    467
    I can't remember if he was *** or not, I got so used to the computer representation of him that I forgot about the real guy, also, how does it currently work with states recognizing *** marriages performed in other states. Since *** marriage isn't federal law and a state can determine its own stance on the issue you'd think states would want to legalize *** marriage and kick up their tourism!
     
  5. Pierrot le Fou

    Pierrot le Fou IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,391
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Some states won't allow *** folk to get married in their state, but will recognize civil unions from other states I believe. Though I may be wrong. Each state is allowed to decide their policy. I'm pretty sure that a civil union in Hawaii is a-okay to be used in Vermont, though I may be mistaken. Basically it's a giant mess now that people are challenging in the courts to define.
     
  6. Xynrx

    Xynrx IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    122
    I'm not exactly up to date on the *** marriage thing in Canada, but last I heard it was legal (shoot me down please if I'm wrong). So I find it extremely difficult for anyone to change the US constitution to make it man+woman where the people up North and possibly other places in the world think its ok.

    It would look really bad if self proclaimed "nation of freedom" limits the freedom of its citizens so drastically when compared to its neighbours. So I guess what I'm saying is that its out of the US's hands I suppose. There isn't really a choice, *** marriage will become a reality and eventually the US will grow to accept that.

    EDIT: Just to add, if Bush does rush in with his hands over his ears to change the constitution to man+woman only, then pretty soon after it will change back. You'll see.
     
  7. Intolerance

    Intolerance IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    1,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    467
    [sarcasm]IT WAS ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE!!!!111one[/sarcasm]
     
  8. asdf

    asdf IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    canada has more freedoms than the US. except when it comes to guns. =P

    anyway, *** marriage is quite debatable, since marriage can be defined as the union of a man and a woman. but excluding *** people from being able to benefit from the legal advantages of having a marraige is denying them benefits simply on based on their sexual orientation. THAT, i believe, is unconstitutional.
     
  9. Xynrx

    Xynrx IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    122
    I really don't see why it is so debatable. Can a heterosexual couple love each other more than a homosexual couple? The love and commitment in both cases are just as strong. Why should there be a limit to one's freedom to openly and legally declare thier bond to each other with marriage?

    I find it extremely hypocritical that the option of changing the constitution in that manner is even an issue. I mean, the only reason I could possibly see people not wanting to acknowledge *** couples is either for religous reasons or homophobia (which pretty much stems from religious reasons... I think anyway). Isn't there supposed to be a separation of church and state? Now people want to run off and change the constitution to cut *** people's chances of marrying off at the knees. Isn't that a little closed-minded? Once again, it's not like they can't love each as much or be less committed to each other as straight people are.

    I often hear the argument "it's just not right." I am sorry to say, but I honestly think this stems from religion. From a strictly scientific standpoint, there is no reason why homosexual beings can't be happy, the fact that they are homosexual must stem from a psycological standpoint. I really don't see how someone can overcome the urges and attractions to the opposite sex without something instinctual telling them otherwise. So they can't reproduce alone, big deal, many heterosexual couples can't either. The human race will survive. From a religious standpoint, "God did not intend man to live that way." And thats the problem I think, "the way God intended." I will not turn this into a religion debate, but I think people need to be a little less closed-minded when thinking about this.

    Anyway, *** marriage will eventually become commonplace, maybe not tomorrow, but it will happen. And guess what will change? Nothing except a handful of people will live happier lives.

    EDIT: coherance
     
  10. SuggestiveName

    SuggestiveName IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    4,820
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    168
    That was rather intolerant of you, Intolerance.
     
  11. Smelly

    Smelly IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
  12. Steel_Avatar

    Steel_Avatar IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Even Dworkin, who argued in favour of the government getting involved in morality (which I myself do not favour), admitted that an argument coming solely from religion or a purely visceral reaction, should not be enough to make law.

    My point is that, however else procreation might be involved, marriage itself offers benefits. Tangible legal and financial benefits. These benefits are offered to married couples, and the argument that it is to encourage procreation doesn't work. If that were true, the government would deny these benefits to sterile couples, or couples that chose not to have children.

    The only thing that separates a *** couple from a heterosexual couple that chooses not to have children is the gender of the individuals. In this case, if the government provides one with something, but not the other, it is a clear case of discrimination on the basis of gender.
     
  13. Smelly

    Smelly IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    A-freakin-men. :buddies:
     
  14. asdf

    asdf IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    actually, the debate lies within the meaning of marriage. some people say marraige inherently means the union of a man and woman, like saying someone's a father implies the person is male. some disagree. but semantics aside, i think the marraige/union thingy should be legal in any case.
     
  15. asdf

    asdf IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    the only argument i can think of that would prohibit *** marriage (for non-religous reasons) would be that the children would not grow up with a 'proper' mother+father household... but even that argument doesn't hold. nothing has shown that children living with *** parents grows up with any kind of problem. and there are many that are even worse off, like divorced parents, single-parent, abusive parents, multiple step-father/mother, etc.
     
  16. Underseer

    Underseer IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,063
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    255
    You're operating under a mistaken assumption. You assume that the purpose of marriage has something to do with love or commitment or making sure children are well cared for. It may be to you and me, but not to those arguring against *** marriage.

    To them the only function of marriage is to outpopulate other religions. Right now Christians are losing the Baby Race with Muslims, which is why they're so up in arms over reproductive issues lately.
     
  17. Underseer

    Underseer IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,063
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Say, did the old thread get deleted?
     
  18. Drosselmeier

    Drosselmeier IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    5,168
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    I can´t really see how *** marriage has anything to do with procreation either. To me it seems to be mainly about two things.

    1. Social stability. *** marriage has the same stabilizing effect as straight marriage. Note that I´m talking about stability for the individuals involved as well as for society as a whole.

    2. Ritual. Ritual is an importaint part of many persons lives. It is one of the few religious needs present in even the most strict atheists. To me it just seems mean to deprive people of a basic psychological/spiritual need by refusing them a meaningful and recognized rite for something as central as union with a lifepartner.
     
  19. Pier

    Pier IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    165
    the whole Matrix is one big *** promotion

    Ok, I ripped this from somewhere, but it is still a good read!
    Here goes:

    *** ELEMENTS IN THE MATRIX

    Pros
    It's totally ***

    Cons
    So are you, but you don't know it yet.

    The Bottom Line
    Well, read the review, that's what it's here for.


    Full Review
    Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie's plot.
    As I write this, there have been more than 1200 reviews of THE MATRIX [1]. I certainly have not read them all, but I have looked through many of those that come highly recommended, and am shocked to find that the film is regularly reviewed as a serious science fiction movie instead of what it truly and obviously is: a brilliant and nuanced study of homoeroticism and a cautionary tale of cross-generational sexual love. It is the fulfillment of the promise that the Warchawski brothers showed when they brought us the instant lesbian-noir classic, BOUND, only a few years before, in 1996.

    The Plotline as Beard

    In the most surface of senses, a recitation of the plot-line of THE MATRIX reveals that it is thinly veiled metaphor, as was required if this film was to receive mainstream acceptance. Much the way that Hollywood studios have always insisted that their *** male stars develop a public profile consisting of either a reputation for womanizing or an attachment to a sex-kitten wife (a beard), so have those institutions insisted that all homoerotic subtext in big budget films remain couched in terms that permit uber-breeder-boys to think they are watching something other than what they are watching. The plot of THE MATRIX is Nicole Kidman to the theme's Tom Cruise.[2]

    Make no mistake, like Dyan Cannon to Cary Grant, Loni Anderson to Burt Reynolds, Florence Henderson to Robert Reed, The San Francisco 49ers to Steve Young and American delusional behavior to Kevin Spacey, the Sci-Fi aspects of this movie exist only as a dodge, a cover and a ruse.[3] The science fiction is the gauzy curtain behind which the real story lurks.

    And make no mistake about this either: The evidence presented herein is undeniable proof that if you enjoyed the film THE MATRIX -- if it spoke to you in some kind of deep and personal way that you are incapable of giving voice to -- you are a latent homosexual.

    The Parable of the Closet

    The print media has, by and large, insisted that the film's lead character Neo (played by Keanu Reeves) is supposed to be a Christ figure and that the arc of the story really parallels a sort of religious transformation – a delivery of the truth. To the contrary, the transformation at issue is one of "closetedness" to openly *** life. Neo comes out of the darkness of self-denial and struggles against sinister forces to become a fully developed participant in the corporeal world. Where he had nearly come to accept the mere life of the mind, he works throughout to accept the duality of his nature.

    At the beginning of THE MATRIX, we find Neo as a seemingly Dilbertish drone at a nameless white collar factory of cube farms and beaten-down co-workers. But he knows something is not right. He senses that he is different, yet he knows that the ways in which he is different will not be readily accepted by society. He also sees, when he seeks to explore that which makes him different, that the reaction of a staid societal power structure is sometimes violent.

    Plus he hangs out at raves.

    But by venturing tentatively into this forbidden world to which he "knows" he belongs, he brings himself to the attention of others like him. They understand his confusion. They have felt his emptiness. They know his pain. They invite him in.

    Morpheus (Lawrence Fishburne) meets young Neo over the internet, tells him, "I've been looking for you my whole life. You are the one." and summons him to his large, immaculately decorated manse, where he starts talking about bondage [of the mind]. Then he offers him a pill, and the next thing you know, we're seeing a shaved and greased up Neo rising out of some futuristic and gelatinous hot tub.

    Neo wakes up, passes out naked on a bed, after complaining about the "soreness of muscles he has never used," then wakes up again cruising around in Morpheus' phat ride.

    None of this is to say, of course, that THE MATRIX ratifies the beliefs of right wing ideologues and PTA moms that older *** men "recruit" youngsters into a *** "lifestyle." It is important to remember that, ultimately, Neo emerges as a self-confident, fully realized, young man. The final image we see is of him standing alone and defiant in a sea of poorly dressed people, before he literally flies away (a somewhat hackneyed metaphor for his newfound happiness and self-actualization [and, one hopes, not a reference to the sort of "light in the loafers" comments that Mr. Furley was apt to make about faux homo Jack Tripper on the 1970's sitcom THREE'S COMPANY]). While the telling of this age old story is sometimes ugly in that it represents an essential truth about how many young men come out of the closet, it is most important to keep in mind that, in the end, as Pamela and Tommy Lee told us in their own epic exploration of innocence lost and budding sexuality, "it's all good."

    One Pill Makes You Larger

    One of the hottest topics of debate at the recent West L.A. College Keanu Studies Seminar[4] was the meaning of the pills in THE MATRIX. From that body arose a virulent rift between 1) those who religiously apply Occam's Razor to everything and insist that the pill was a drug, and 2) those who think everything is about sex who insist that the pills are a symbol for sex.

    The majority agreed that the pills are clearly a mere stand-in for *** sex. The majority also agreed that this is one of the few areas where THE MATRIX sadly strays from its otherwise consistently pro-*** position. "It will open up whole new worlds for you," Fishburne is careful to explain. "It will give you understanding." This is clearly a reference to that forbidden thing which Neo has always known he wanted, and which will ratify his barely cognizable sense of his own nature

    But this is also where the break from the film's own conventions occurs: "Once you go down that hole, you can never turn back."

    Suddenly, the film seems to subscribe to the religious right's "sexual act as sexual identity" theory of homosexuality: that it is the sodomy that makes one *** and not the gayness that makes the sodomy appealing, and worse, that once you perform an act that can be labeled "*** sex" you are then "a homosexual," irrevocably. As anyone who has ever attended an English boarding school or U.C. Berkeley knows, this is simply not the case.

    Telling is Neo's question: "I can't go back, can I?"

    To which Morpheus knowingly replies, "No. But if you could, would you really want to?"

    Probably not. But that sort of misses the point. While Neo himself may become self-actualized by "the act," it is certainly not the case that "the act" defines the actor. If Morpheus had merely said, "Do you really want to?" the quote would ring more true.

    Keanu Reeves as Symbol of Homosexual Desire

    The selection of Reeves (the son of a costume designer and theater director, and later of a hair salon owner) to play the messianic deliverer Neo was clearly purposeful. In both real life and in his films Reeves is perceived as a clueless but attractive dolt. He comes to this movie with baggage, and that baggage clearly marks him as a particular type of icon: the clean cut, very young man as mere sexual object. The Party-Boy.

    Moreover, Reeves' baggage marks his particular brand of sexuality as distinctly ***. The rumors of a surreptitious marriage to David Geffen[6], the juxtaposition in nearly all of his films of the characters' utter inability to realistically connect with the female lead, while bonding on an almost transcendent level with his male workmates is a sure sign of every casting director's intent.

    Think about it. In SPEED, Reeves plays a member of the LAPD bomb squad, partnered with more experienced, yet uncannily boyish, Jeff Daniels, with whom he shares both a locker-room banter relationship and one of fatherly idolatry. When, near the end of that film, his partner is killed, the Reeves character finds emotion for the first time in the entire story.

    Compare this to the relationship he has with the Sandra Bullock character in that movie. While it is nominally put forward as a romantic relationship, really Reeves is distant in a fatherly and condescending way. This portrayal is no accident. Bullock is undoubtably that film's symbolic embodiment of the venerable *** sidekick: the "f*g-hag." I will address this topic in more detail below.

    The Teacher as Sugar-Daddy; The Guide as Chicken-Hawk

    I have heard it said, and seen it written, that the Lawrence Fishburne character, Morpheus, represents the father; frequently that he represents THE Father. These interpretations are not far off the mark. Morpheus is, indeed, a daddy figure of sorts: a Sugar-Daddy.

    Morpheus, like Neo, is, among other things, a seeker after the joys of the corporeal world. And like some older men, Morpheus sees in Neo [perhaps] a final opportunity at that world. This is the stereotypical (though perhaps not typical) representation of May-December romances between both hetero and homosexual couples. He trades his perceived wisdom and experience for Neo's body. He is the sage who surrounds himself with young, beautiful boys and girls. And they always hang out at his pad. He supplies the pills, the ride and the training in the grown-up ways of the body. And ultimately, he is a tragic figure, like so many chicken-hawks before him. He is a millennial version of STUDIO 54 owner Steve Rubbell.

    All other Reeves movies have led up to this relationship portrayal. Think George Carlin as the teacher and protector, and ultimately the idolizer of young boys in BILL AND TED'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE. Think Jeff Daniels in SPEED. Al Pacino as the wisest of all hedonists in DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. Patrick Swayze as the more experienced but no less immaculately coiffed older man who Reeves eventually turns on in POINT BREAK. John Malkovich as the manipulative teacher who Reeves both admires and hates (and eventually seeks to supplant) in DANGEROUS LIAISONS. Dennis Hopper as the wise but deeply lonely and disturbed knee at which young boys learn their wicked ways in THE RIVERS EDGE. Need I even discuss MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO? Perhaps this paragraph should have been placed in the Keanu Reeves as Symbol of Homosexual Desire section. Well, it's stuck here now.

    An added dimension comes from the extra-movie baggage that Fishburne himself brings to the role. Having been a 13 and 14 year old on the set of the sage and guiding hand of Francis Ford Coppola during the filming of APOCALYPSE NOW, he disappeared into obscurity until the early 1990's, when he re-emerged as the learned father and protector in BOYZ N THE HOOD. Fishburne the actor obviously represents the innocent transformed to sanguine leader. This is something altogether different from an omniscient, omnipresent Father in the sense that the mainstream press has analyzed this movie.

    A Conclusion, Almost

    Upon first submission, the editors of this review found the above arguments unconvincing and insisted that THE MATRIX is really just a mediocre hodgepodge of new agey religious philosophy, stolen imagery from Lewis Carroll's THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS, and cool effects. And it is perhaps the bane of the involved writer to lose the forest for the trees and forget that what is most obvious to her is not so obvious to her readers. The mere existence of the Knights of the Matrix (a Fraternal Order of *** Men -- http://hometown.aol.com/knightsofmatrix/statement.htm) should make it clear to any reader what the Wachawsky brothers were going for, but some people simply insist on missing the point. It is therefore worth discussing, briefly, the role of supporting characters and plot devices in order to convince readers that this film is what the author claims it to be.

    The Gayest of Scenes

    I really shouldn't have to go any further than a description of a scene from the middle of the movie, where we find Morpheus' fey young assistant "programming" some prime physicality into Neo after telling him, "I'm really excited to see what you're capable of."

    When Morpheus asks how Neo is developing, the fey assistant answers, "Ten hours straight. He's a machine."

    Do I need to go into this?

    After being programed, Neo and Morpheus put on their jammies and test the limits of their physical endurance. "Faster, faster, faster," prods Morpheus. If this is not an homage to the repertoire of *** indie quasi-porn pioneer Bruce LaBruce, nothing is.

    Agent Smith as "Cured" and Self-Hating Homosexual

    While it is unlikely to have struck a chord with most American audiences, the irony of Hugo Weaving's portrayal of Agent Smith was probably not lost on those viewers who are either Australian, drag queens, or both. In 1994, Weaving received an AFI acting award nomination for his performance in Steven Elliot's *** camp classic PRISCILLA: QUEEN OF THE DESERT. He has also appeared in the paean to *** male sexuality BEDROOMS AND HALLWAYS.

    The Wachowski's must have been quivering with delight at their own cleverness in having selected Weaving to play Agent Smith, the street level jack-boot in the army of conformity. It is Agent Smith who bears primary responsibility for attempting to bring Neo back into the fold, or destroy him. That an actor previously associated with out *** roles was chosen to represent the virulent conformist on a mission was clearly as purposeful as the casting selections of Reeves and Fishburne. Weaving is clearly meant to represent the "cured homosexual." Like all twelve of the "formerly ***" people who have undergone "reparative therapy" under the auspices of one of America's "transformational ministries" Smith is more vehemently opposed to Neo's "lifestyle" than any of those who have never engaged in the lifestyle themselves. "Ex-***'s" like ex-smokers, can simply not tolerate that there are others who have failed to make the same transformation. And like ex-smokers, the urge remains, in spite of the denials.

    In the film's climactic scene, Agent Smith and Neo engage in an epic battle that is finally resolved when Neo "jumps inside" of Smith, literally. After a moment of confusion, then horror, Smith explodes, an obvious metaphor for the demise of the character's own barely held conformist beliefs about himself and his own nature.

    The Oracle as Dual and Paradoxical Symbol: Transformational Ministry and Hint About Greek Love

    Halfway through THE MATRIX, after Neo seems to have already accepted what he is, he is introduced to a voodoo woman referred to only as The Oracle. The symbolism here is ham-fisted and obvious even by Hollywood standards. Clearly, the woman is imbued with religious characteristics that imply that she is a representative of the spiritual world. Arguably, she is intended to be a stand-in for transformational ministries as a whole. She is an authority figure whose sole purpose in the film is to cast doubt on Neo's belief in his "lifestyle choice."

    The central question posed to Neo throughout the story is "Is he the one?" But really, it is "Is he one? Is he ***? Is he one of us?" The oracle insists that he is not. "I am sorry young man," she says, "but you already know that you are not."

    And a part of Neo, of course, wants to believe that he is not. Who would WANT it, given the societal consequences. In the end, though, Morpheus knows better: He is.

    But The Oracle serves a dual and paradoxical purpose, which is once again to telegraph the gayness of the story's undertones. As everyone watching the film surely picked up on at first introduction of the character, an Oracle in literature is always a reference to the Oracle at Delphi that appears in both Sophocles' OEDIPUS REX and Homer's THE ODYSSEY. Both of these authors were Greek. And as everyone knows, the Greeks believed strongly that young men should be trained in both the corporeal and incorporeal ways of the world by their older mentors.[6] The Greek Way has become nearly synonymous with homosexuality.

    So that's kind of fun, seeing as the Oracle at Delphi was always presenting people with paradoxes and riddles to figure out.

    Trinity as "***-hag"

    Professor Pookster has argued, rather convincingly, that "Every *** has a ***-hag." At least that's the argument she always gives me for why she spends so much time with her friend Sean. The ***-hag is typically a single, frequently bitter, young woman of about the subject man's age who spends a lot of time eating and shopping with the man. She will act as his beard when his parents come over and at office parties. She will sometimes be the committee of one before whom he submits potential lovers for approval (before disregarding her advice and sleeping with the potential lover anyway).

    The role of Trinity (played by ex-model Carrie-Ann Moss) serves this purpose in the Matrix. Think about it. It's her job to go and fetch Neo. It's her job to make sure Neo is not a threat to her close friend Morpheus. And all the while she pines for young Neo, wishing that circumstances were different, and only having the courage to kiss him when there is no chance that he will know he's been kissed. When Neo is briefly convinced by The Oracle that he "is not" it is Trinity who worries about how Morpheus will take it.

    The Woman in the Red Dress

    [Publisher's deadline precluded inclusion of this chapter]

    In Summary

    The author would like to thank in advance the anticipated prompt attention to this article that will be paid by the makers of the film THE CELLULOID CLOSET. All ideas expressed herein may, with appropriate royalty payments or a one time licensing fee, be included in the sequel to that fine, fine film.
    ___________________________
    1. Actually, when I started writing this, there were 900 Matrix reviews, then sometime later, there were 1200, then, just before "The Fall" there were about 1500. Now there are only about 954.

    2. See, OPEN SECRET by David Ehrenstein (William Morrow Press) for a discussion of the use of arranged marriages and relationships (known as "beards") in Hollywood to conceal the identity of *** male stars. While this book does not, in fact, confirm that Tom Cruise is ***, it doesn't say he isn't either. Also read Michaelangelo Signorelli and Armistead Maupin, who like talking about this sort of thing.

    3. For no reason at all, here is a very short list of other celebrities rumored to be ***: Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Wynona Ryder, Dennis Quaid, Ricky Martin, Paul Newman, Jodie Foster, Andre Aggasi, Matthew Broderick, Jann Wenner, Sarah Jessica Parker, Troy Aikman.

    4. Which actually took place in my room, like 6 months ago, and mostly involved me saying to he Pookster, about Reeves "He's totally ***, what are you, high?" and her covering her ears with both hands and screaming "NONONONONONONONO I'M NOT LISTENING."

    5. See, DAVID GEFFEN BUILDS, BUYS, AND SELLS THE NEW HOLLYWOOD, by Tom King which might address the Geffen/Reeves axis, but I don't really know for sure, because I haven't read it.
     
  20. Usufruct

    Usufruct IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Actually I believe you are right, it would be recognized in Vermont. However if it wasn't, you could just get a new one in Vermont because we're cool like that.

    I think there should be two types of marriage. Religious marriage, for the religious folks, and non-religious marriage. Non-religious marriage would include anyone who basically isn't allowed to get married under religious marriage, or those of us who just don't want to.

    It shouldn't matter if you're *** or straight, rich or poor, naked or clothed - any two people who love each other enough to want to spend their lives together should enjoy the same financial benefits as everyone else who does the same thing.
     

Share This Page