These are the structures that were explored in each film that premiered at “Reel Dialogue.” Each film attempts to establish the real definition and impact of homosexuality.
The first of the three documentaries was “No More Lies” by IMA student Sam Feder. Done as an interview, it depicts the irony and complexities involved with being homosexuality and how the world perceives the LGBT community, specifically the “transman.”
Old-school beliefs of heterosexuality have been used as the backdrop to this argument, seeing it as the best method of examining that which is not meant to be. However, it seems that study-after-study and research-after-research, the only determinant is the “Adam and Eve” factor. There exists no other difference.
David Pavlosky’s “Don’t Bring Scottie” illustrates how old school mentalities plus religion have kept people ignorant of the LGBT community. David’s family comes from a strong religious background and although they are a close family they have excluded David’s boyfriend Scottie from the family as if he were non-existent.
His eldest brother Jeff was his biggest challenge. He appeared obnoxious and ignorant and would repeatedly state “I don’t condone homosexuality but I won’t pass judgment,” only to contradict himself later, “you represent gray and I want the world to be black and white.”
David struggled to include Scottie in his family functions, however it wasn’t until his father had two heart attacks and open heart surgery that his family welcomed Scottie into their lives.
His eldest brother Jeff was his biggest challenge. He appeared obnoxious and ignorant and would repeatedly state “I don’t condone homosexuality but I won’t pass judgment,” only to contradict himself later, “you represent gray and I want the world to be black and white.”
David struggled to include Scottie in his family functions, however it wasn’t until his father had two heart attacks and open heart surgery that his family welcomed Scottie into their lives.
“Out at Work” by Tami Gold and Kelly Anderson goes inside the lives of three individuals (Cheryl, Ron and Nat) that face discrimination at the workplace.
Cheryl was fired by Cracker Barrel for not displaying “normal heterosexual values.” Although Cracker Barrel was legally allowed to fire homosexuals, the media exposure of Cheryl’s case allowed her to move on, get a new job and have children with her partner.
Ron was harassed by his co-workers for being gay despite his hard-working demeanor.
As an employee of the New York Public Library Nat did not get harassed in fact everyone loved him. Instead he was fighting to receive medical benefit for his ailing partner.
Each character fought against discrimination. What was most influential was the huge support system that followed each individual.
Arguments range from the religious angle, to the for the betterment of our children, yet these are barely supported with sufficient, strong facts or stats. Just recently, the New York Times published an article entitled, “What’s Good for the Kids” that explores several decades of research conducted on same-sex partnership and parenting. While there were some interesting points, the long-term effects in children of same-sex couples were zero, null and nada. In other words, that these kids grow up to become regular citizens of society; rebutting the fearful thinking that homosexuals are the bedrock for the continuance of more wild, crazy behavior.
Cheryl was fired by Cracker Barrel for not displaying “normal heterosexual values.” Although Cracker Barrel was legally allowed to fire homosexuals, the media exposure of Cheryl’s case allowed her to move on, get a new job and have children with her partner.
Ron was harassed by his co-workers for being gay despite his hard-working demeanor.
As an employee of the New York Public Library Nat did not get harassed in fact everyone loved him. Instead he was fighting to receive medical benefit for his ailing partner.
Each character fought against discrimination. What was most influential was the huge support system that followed each individual.
Arguments range from the religious angle, to the for the betterment of our children, yet these are barely supported with sufficient, strong facts or stats. Just recently, the New York Times published an article entitled, “What’s Good for the Kids” that explores several decades of research conducted on same-sex partnership and parenting. While there were some interesting points, the long-term effects in children of same-sex couples were zero, null and nada. In other words, that these kids grow up to become regular citizens of society; rebutting the fearful thinking that homosexuals are the bedrock for the continuance of more wild, crazy behavior.
Seems like a fair enough win for same-sex marriage advocates and the LGBT community. But there are some that believe that there is much more to be done.
Yet, as these films demonstrate, grassroots efforts—whether with a camera, paintbrush or blog—don’t fall short of reaffirming the rights, acceptance and support that belong to all.
Related Articles & Content:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/magazine/08fob-wwln-t.html
No comments:
Post a Comment