Reply #1: Yeah, the other Andrew has been ranting for weeks on his blog about this [View All]

On edit: misread byline. Thought this was about Andrew Sullivan:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com

Ah well. The other Andrew's take on this movie is pretty entertaining. It's actually very interesting to me as an insight into the pathology of denial...

OK, so seeing Bush endorse the Federal Marriage Amendment was a big shock to Andy's system. Ranting, outrage, threats of dire revenge, hurt, pain, betrayal, the whole bit--it makes very good reading, I have to say. However, it still hasn't wised him up abotu a lot of things, especially the war in Iraq and, you know, corporate greed.

His response to *The Passion* is particularly interesting because on the blog he keeps wondering why none of the other conservative commentators can tell that this is not a moving and devout treatment of the greatest story ever told, but rather two hours of "psychotic sadism." The movie, like the FMA, has become a symbol of just how big a perceptions gap there is between him and the conservatives he thought were his allies. Why can't they see that *The Passion* is sick and twisted and all about repressing homoerotic desire so violently that it returns as blood-soaked sadism? *Because when it comes to sex, they're all just as sick and twisted and repressed as Mel is.* They *can't* see it the way he does because none of them are even close to being able to recognize and acknowledge the weird and wacked shapes that sexuality takes in that subterranean territory into which they're always trying to thrust it.

I think that's a big part of why he reacted against the movie as strongly as he has; it's not just about Mel, it's about his relationship to the American right. Yes, Andrew, this is your party. You have aligned yourself with the most powerful political engine of anti-gay hatred and bigotry in the country. How's that workin' for ya?

Yeesh,

The Plaid Adder