The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

When We Rise

Re: "When We Rise"

mcbrion said:
It was interesting. Having lived there during some of those days, it was nice to see The Castro Theatre. I also liked that they did not shy away from the racism in the gay community back then, something that continued well into the 90s. I wonder if they'll cover the period when the first dyke bar appeared at the corner of Collingwood and 18th Streets. The gay men did not like that AT ALL. I haven't seen how far the movie extends into the future, but I'd like to see that, since the lesbian's comments in the first episode that they were tired of helping gay men when it seemed that gay men rarely get past their groins. That was right on target and certainly was the case after 1974, when the gay community and the police department reached a detente and the raids stopped. Once they knew the police weren't going to arrest and assault you with their batons, it seemed a large portion of the gay male community took that for free license to have sex anywhere they wanted, and that was when the gay community exploded into public view and the Folsom turned into THE leather neighborhood in San Francisco. And yet, when the first lesbian bar appeared around 1984 at the corner of Collingwood and 18th streets, the gay macho culture's dislike for lesbians in 'their' neighborhood was unmistakeable. Boystown had been breached. It would be good to see ALL the history, and Cleve was certainly aware of that, since he lived in the Castro.
Click to expand...

So basically, it paints gay men as racist misogynist cavemen who only think about sex and fuck in the streets?
I don't think I have any interest at all in watching this now.
 
History isn't for the purpose of showing 'positive' or 'negative' movies for people's enjoyment. It was history. It's what happened, so this won't be anyone's cup of tea who's looking for a 'positive' perspective. It was NOT positive until after 1974, when the raids stopped, I can tell you that from personal experience.
I'm sure there will be happy gay movies for those so inclined.

But I admit to being flabbergasted reading your having stated that we're hard pressed to find someone who isn't homophobic nowadays??? Surely you jest, Shirley. You can find that pretty easily, even in San Francisco, even today. And you must not be paying attention to the Vice President of the United States, who is entirely homophobic.
 
Karen_Walker said:
I hope lgbt of color will be represented although I won't get my hopes up
Click to expand...

Well, they sure showed the racism evident in the gay male community in the early 70s in one scene with Ken Jones, so there's hope. But I'm thinking the answer to that is: No. But I, like you, hope to be surprised even further. Just that one scene astounded me with its truthfulness. If they continue to be truthful, maybe we'll both get our wish. The last movie that addressed people of color was "Word is Out' in the early '80s, unless you count Marlon Riggs' documentary, Tongues Untied.
 
mcbrion said:
History isn't for the purpose of showing 'positive' or 'negative' movies for people's enjoyment. It was history. It's what happened, so this won't be anyone's cup of tea who's looking for a 'positive' perspective. It was NOT positive until after 1974, when the raids stopped, I can tell you that from personal experience.
I'm sure there will be happy gay movies for those so inclined.

But I admit to being flabbergasted reading your having stated that we're hard pressed to find someone who isn't homophobic nowadays??? Surely you jest, Shirley. You can find that pretty easily, even in San Francisco, even today. And you must not be paying attention to the Vice President of the United States, who is entirely homophobic.
Click to expand...

I didn't really word that well enough, I meant to say that there is a LOT less homophobia than 15-20+ years ago... before, anyone could make any kind of homophobic comment to anyone, and it was generally accepted... these days, homophobia is not socially acceptable and most circles would not accept it.
There of course is still a lot of homophobia, but compared to years ago, things have improved drastically.
 
Re: "When We Rise"

mcbrion said:
It was interesting. Having lived there during some of those days, it was nice to see The Castro Theatre. I also liked that they did not shy away from the racism in the gay community back then, something that continued well into the 90s. I wonder if they'll cover the period when the first dyke bar appeared at the corner of Collingwood and 18th Streets. The gay men did not like that AT ALL. I haven't seen how far the movie extends into the future, but I'd like to see that, since the lesbian's comments in the first episode that they were tired of helping gay men when it seemed that gay men rarely get past their groins. That was right on target and certainly was the case after 1974, when the gay community and the police department reached a detente and the raids stopped. Once they knew the police weren't going to arrest and assault you with their batons, it seemed a large portion of the gay male community took that for free license to have sex anywhere they wanted, and that was when the gay community exploded into public view and the Folsom turned into THE leather neighborhood in San Francisco. And yet, when the first lesbian bar appeared around 1984 at the corner of Collingwood and 18th streets, the gay macho culture's dislike for lesbians in 'their' neighborhood was unmistakeable. Boystown had been breached. It would be good to see ALL the history, and Cleve was certainly aware of that, since he lived in the Castro.
Click to expand...



I believe it comes up to present day.
 
And, homophobia is not as violent as it was, so it is easy to see that and be encouraged by that, as it is a big difference in the sense of personal safety that is enjoyed today versus years ago. Gay bashing in the literal sense is way down versus even domestic violence in gay couples. So, by relative measure, you'd think we'd hear more about domestic violence as a focus, but it's still homophobia as it's easier to gen up.

I still believe the greater threat to homosexuals (in the US) is being closeted, and I think it is still more the norm than anyone is willing to admit in the LGBT population. Just like we stopped talking about venereal disease, including HIV, we sorta bought into the TV shows and media portrayal of out gays as the norm, and I think there is plenty of evidence that closeted gays still greatly outnumber the out ones. Then there is the selective definition of out, with men electing to be out in a sector but not out at work or in other social settings.

And there isn't any sea of Fremen waiting to take over the planet, but we do exist in much larger numbers than seen, and if that were changed, we'd see more people sit down and shut up when it comes to talking about us instead of to us.
 
It seems only two people actually watched last night's first episode. I would suggest the rest of you watch it before passing judgement. Do you like it when people pass judgment on you because you're gay without getting to know you? That's what some of you are doing to this mini-series.

I realize I just made a lot people mad. But, I'm not real popular here anyway.
 
SaskGuy said:
Now that more trans people are appearing in TV shows and movies, your only thought is to complain that there aren't more?
I guess some people are never satisfied.
Click to expand...

No, my thought is that you find it perfectly keen to reduce the trans and gq history in the lgbt rights movement into a single character because you don't care to see how people other than gay men helped/influenced in the causes. Instead of acknowledging that so far in such historical-based films we've been wildly mis & under represented, you come back with "At least there's one, quit complaining!" You sound like all the straight people.

I'll watch the series, but again, much like Karen, I ain't holding out hope.
 
-I mean, it's rather difficult to pretend we didn't exist or merely hung on your 'glorious coattails's' if you were actually familiar with some of your own history. If they don't at least mention Lou Sullivan (considering it's 'Frisco) or any of the crossdressing laws & effects I'm gonna be, let's call it 'disgusted'.
 
If it's not just well-toned young extremely attractive white guys in various states of undress, what's the point of watching, really?

Lex
 
Re: "When We Rise"

SaskGuy said:
So basically, it paints gay men as racist misogynist cavemen who only think about sex and fuck in the streets?
I don't think I have any interest at all in watching this now.
Click to expand...
Nope, not even close to what I said, and if you're going to read 100 words on a page and that can sway you, you're not using your own intelligence.
I SAID 'back then.' You've got some selective reading going on there.
But if the chance to actually learn something about gay history doesn't make you want to watch it, you're right: you shouldn't watch it. Because that would mean you really don't want to learn anything about where we were once and where we are now. I never had the luxury, being Black and all. I had to pay attention to the world around me, and it was pretty hateful the first score of years of my life. And I bring up being Black, because if you're White, this was your first Revolution. It was my second. Civil Rights was my First Revolution. So, I came into it far ahead of most white guys, who'd never been told they were second-class citizens before this.

Live dangerously: watch it. It's historically accurate so far, and I've no reason to think Cleve made anything up.
 
What does the forboding title of this TV show mean?

Rise_of_the_Robots_SNES_ScreenShot1.gif
Rise%20Of%20The%20Zombies%201.jpg
rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-logo-01.jpg
 
Well, the first historical inaccuracy appears early in the second episode, but it's forgivable. Puzzling, but forgivable.

Sylvester is singing 'Mighty Real,' which didn't even come out until Spring 1978 and, at this point, Harvey hasn't even been elected yet. He didn't get elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors until November 1977. This is a minor rewrite of history, but what was the point? They could have woven this in easily into the story in the right year.
 
This movie is really affecting me. I am saddened and amazed by it for a few different reasons.


I am struck by the fact that ABC gave a warning because of language, but gave no warning at all that they were going to show a guy balls deep in another guy.
 
As gay man who grew in the 50's when the word gay was taboo, to see the struggles from Stonewall to Marriage Equality. The Aids crisis and the future of LGTB.
 
We've been watching but to tell the truth I don't want to watch the AIDS part, I lived it am still sad about all the friends we lost.

I'm grateful that there were people braver than I who put their asses on the line for our rights. I never in a million years thought I would be able to marry my life long partner and this show has given me an idea of who those people are and what they did.....
 
BTW, I tried to watch the series, but it just was unappealing. I did watch the bit about the making of, but there is something about sanitized, prettified casts that turns me off when it is supposed to be re-enactments, etc.

I always felt that way about Leave It to Beaver, The Cosby Show, and especially dumb casting like Farrah Fawcett in The Donner Party. Sorry, no disrespect to the cause, just the medium. It was pretty bad, like soap opera bad.
 
This part of the story feels very different in writing. The first part grabbed my attention right from the start. The amazing acting from the young cast kept me enthralled for the first and second installments. This installment though let me down.

It skipped ahead a lot without covering anything in between. Some of the actors were aged into new actors which were stars, while a couple of characters stayed with the same actors as before. In a movie such as this, in my opinion known celebrities are unneeded. The people that watch a movie such as this is not watching because of star power, but because we are interested in the subject. For the three young leads I feel the movie may be star making. Furthermore, Jonathan Majors looks nothing like Michael Kenneth Williams. Both great actors, but I don’t buy them as the same person.


The part that I disliked the most was actually an ad for Jimmy Kimmel advertising President Bush as a guest on his show. That was a slap to the face. After what that man did to be advertising him, that pissed me off. Couldn’t he have been on next week? Immediately after the installment there was another ad. That was bad form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top