Saturday, May 05, 2007
How does a pro-homo review the movie "Zoo" about bestiality?
This article on Slate is so disgusting, that I don't really feel like expounding on the topic. Except to say that William Saletan reaches the absurd level of trying to equate bestiality to heterosexuality (which he constructs as all bad), and states that it is the opposite of homosexuality (which he constructs as all good). Yes, you read that right.
He does this by selectively picking anything in the characteristics of the bestiality people portrayed and how they related to the animals, and makes it into a resemblance of "heterosexuality," (which, as we know, is all bad and disgusting). Then he says that from a cultural and emotional perspective, bestiality must then oppose the wonderfulness of homosexuality, because the latter is all good and magnificent -- and the opposite of heterosexuality in every way!
At least, because he is equating bestiality to heterosexuality, Saletan spares us the line that the men portrayed in "Zoo" have a bestial gene and anyone who opposes bestiality is full of hate; he does describe the men as profoundly dysfunctional.
(cont. here)
He does this by selectively picking anything in the characteristics of the bestiality people portrayed and how they related to the animals, and makes it into a resemblance of "heterosexuality," (which, as we know, is all bad and disgusting). Then he says that from a cultural and emotional perspective, bestiality must then oppose the wonderfulness of homosexuality, because the latter is all good and magnificent -- and the opposite of heterosexuality in every way!
At least, because he is equating bestiality to heterosexuality, Saletan spares us the line that the men portrayed in "Zoo" have a bestial gene and anyone who opposes bestiality is full of hate; he does describe the men as profoundly dysfunctional.
(cont. here)
Labels: bestiality, homosexuality, propaganda, slate
