Hey, your site was on tv last week and this week you're on the radio....you don't suck. In fact, it's time for congratulations!!

I heard you and you did NOT suck! The only problem with that show is that they scheduled 4 people when they barely had time for 2. I think they should have had just you and that blogger, Chris. You two could have had a good give'n'take.

LLP is sure getting attention! CONGRATS!

What? No Pudding talk?

HA HA HA !!!

I just relistened and agree that I was not LAME. It was obvious they did not have enough time and I was cut short before making my grand statement! HA!

Kidding, but, yes, I was not that crappy. hope they invite me back.

The best thing you could do is see the movie! Then we can have a grand discussion....

Conservatives will have a moral issue about this movie, but it will have nothing to do with homosexuality: the moral response will deal not with the two men being gay but with them being ADULTERERS.

I agree with Oscar Wilde, who said "There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well-written or poorly written, that is all."

Saying conservatives will have a moral issue with a film because it depicts adultery would mean that conservatives believe that depicting adultery (esp without making the characters pay for it) is the same as endorsing it. This is exactly the same as the identity politics view, which holds that if minorities are featured in films, the purpose should be to 'provide good role models' (a totalitarian view that reduces minorities to either victims or paragons, never complicated human beings who contain both good & bad qualities).

Because of political correctness in Hollywood, I'm doubtful a non-sentimental film can be made from Proulx's story, which is oblique & unsentimental. It's a misnomer to call these characters gay. I'm a homo myself, & aviod the g-word because it's been so politicized & carries too much baggage.

I'm 40, & the culture is more open now, but no straight person can understand the hunger gays have to see something of themselves reflected back from something as simple as a movie (something straight people don't even notice, because every movie depicts men & women in love). Gays suffer far more psychologically than politically, because it's profoundly disorienting to grow up in a culture that rejects who you are as a person, & places no value on your relationships.

Even now in 2005, this simple story about 2 people is seen as 'controversial' & may not get a wide release. So while I have little patience with gay activists, I have to cut my fellow homos some slack if they try to make the movie something it isn't, because there are almost no films showing real relationships between men, & even fewer where the gender is incidental rather than the focus.