the Pythoning of America

Destroying the concept of “normal” by the Lorettas of the Left
who seem to be asserting that “silly” is now an acceptable level of intellectual discourse
(i.e. the Left’s eternal struggle against reality)

~ vid ~

“Oh, dear. What have they done, now?” you ask.

Vanity Fair has weighed in on the blockbuster movie “Captain America: Civil War” to lament the hero’s “heterosexual virility.”

Yeah, I knowww !
Heterosexual virility, indeed;
and this movie is actually shown to young, impressionable children, to boot! /sarc

[Vanity Fair writer Joanna Robinson said the directors] should not have said fans may “interpret the relationship [Cap with Bucky] however they want to interpret it” since the character explicitly makes clear [Cap's] attraction to women.

Where’s the gender-identity/sexual-preference ambiguity?
How can one be expected to exist in a reality of one’s own choosing, if movie characters and stuff are going to be explicitly defined? For crying out loud, this is arrrrrrt !
I mean, next thing you know, they’ll actually be judging people by stable concepts of right and wrong, rather than by what the cool kids have been saying for the past month. /sarc

“As if to put the nail in the coffin of speculation, Bucky and Cap paused for a moment in the middle of snowy Siberia to reminisce about their days chasing skirts in pre-War Brooklyn,” …. “It’s a sweet, human bonding moment but one that also bristles with heterosexual virility.

Evidently, bristling heterosexual virility contaminates male human bonding or something.
Trouble is, the icky military’s full of that kind’a macho/hetero/brotherhood stuff.
Seems as if Robinson hasn’t actually watched any good war movies.

If Disney isn’t inclined to give audiences a gay superhero, couldn’t they have at least left us the dream of Bucky and Cap? … Doesn’t ‘Captain America: Civil War’ go out of its way to “define” Bucky and Steve’s relationship when Cap smooches Sharon Carter … while Bucky looks on approvingly? Where’s the room for interpretation in that moment?” [story]

Oh, the specificity!

Movie prob’ly should’ve included a trigger warning or sumpthin’.

(What? Yeah, Vanity Fail. The media seem to have devolved into incompetent, whiney drones with only a tenuous grasp on sanity and objective reality.)

It occurs to me that this kind of thing deserves an award.
Sure, I could have awarded a Vinny, but I think this calls for a special one.
Totally off-topic, but who does Graham Chapman remind one of in this skit?

Rewrote my commentary to remove some ambiguities.


  1. Fawkes News (V for Article V)
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 4:51 am |

    Perhaps the author shouldn’t be watching Captain America movies. The Ambiguously Gay Duo seems more appropriate.

  2. Merle
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 6:20 am |

    HMMM, the Loretta. I hope it catches on….


  3. A Nobody from Nowhere
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 6:34 am |

    The Cap is the only one of that gang of characters whose babies I want to have. Just sayin’

  4. Posted May 10, 2016 at 11:08 am |

    If vanity fair doesn’t like it, then do something about – if you’re man enough.

  5. DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this)
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 11:09 am |

    And why was he never promoted?
    I mean, geeze, even I made LtCol.

  6. Claire: rebellious pink pig with car keys - and a *cause*
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 12:08 pm |

    “The narcissism of small differences”

  7. Claire: rebellious pink pig with car keys - and a *cause*
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 12:16 pm |

    BTW, I think The Loretta could be a daily award….

    *bop*holds head*waaaagh*

  8. ZZMike
    Posted May 10, 2016 at 4:59 pm |

    “Vanity Fair” isn’t really on my A-list of Serious Stuff to Read.