User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 98

  1. #31
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Not only has he developed, I also don't think that it would be an odd thing or out of character. A Bond who enjoys life far too much to throw anybody out of his bed - woman, man or goat (or one, two, three or a whole football team of each) - is very much in character with the hedonistic Connery style character.

    He is too sexy not to bed everybody regardless of gender.

    ESTP galore!
    !

    James Bond is pure confidence, masculinity, and sex. I don't see how any of that would be lost if he was bisexual.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  2. #32
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    Yeah, been there and done that. Repented of it all.

  3. #33
    Riva
    Guest

    Default

    James Bond stands for masculinity/masculine-heroics which are wrong but admirable at the same time.

    Infact he is the epitome of masculinity in movies - he is not a boy who is cute but a man who is feral yet mature.

    Homosexuality is not a part of modern day masculinity.

    The homosexual masculinity died with the Greek empire.

    It is dead now that concept.

    So yes - though I would not be offended - I would be disappointed.

    We live in a SJ society.

  4. #34
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riva View Post
    James Bond stands for masculinity/masculine-heroics which are wrong but admirable at the same time.

    Infact he is the epitome of masculinity in movies - he is not a boy who is cute but a man who is feral yet mature.

    Homosexuality is not a part of modern day masculinity.

    The homosexual masculinity died with the Greek empire.

    It is dead now that concept.

    So yes - though I would not be offended - I would be disappointed.

  5. #35
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    !

    James Bond is pure confidence, masculinity, and sex. I don't see how any of that would be lost if he was bisexual.
    Fine, to detach from the timing with the movie's release:

    Does this approach apply if Bond is a top? A bottom? Both? Or what?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #36
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riva View Post
    James Bond stands for masculinity/masculine-heroics which are wrong but admirable at the same time.

    Infact he is the epitome of masculinity in movies - he is not a boy who is cute but a man who is feral yet mature.

    Homosexuality is not a part of modern day masculinity.

    The homosexual masculinity died with the Greek empire.

    It is dead now that concept.

    So yes - though I would not be offended - I would be disappointed.

    We live in a SJ society.
    And yet, it's the SJ on this thread who isn't getting offended.

    Your post is all about the gay/bisexual media stereotype, anyway, not the basic facts of sexual orientation. If a man is gay or bisexual, that doesn't mean he has to be any less masculine than a straight man.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Fine, to detach from the timing with the movie's release:

    Does this approach apply if Bond is a top? A bottom? Both? Or what?
    I hadn't thought about it that far, but I suppose he'd have to be top. I think his character might have personal issues with being penetrated, because that would involve more vulnerability than if he was the one doing the penetrating. James Bond is all about power, and not at all about vulnerability.

    Edit: I think him being a bottom might work in the context of the other guy serving him sexually, though. It's easier for me to separate James Bond from heterosexuality, than it is for me to separate him from the act of having sex with someone who either behaves like a prostitute, or actually is a prostitute. (I haven't seen most of the older Bond movies, but in recent ones, it seems like he usually has two love interests: one who's weaker than him and behaves like a prostitute, and one who is either his equal or almost his equal, who he flirts with but may or not actually have sex with during the movie.)

    Another edit: I am probably the wrong person to answer this question. I'm not knowledgeable on the subtleties of top/bottom cultural connotation.

    (I do agree with you about the timing, to be fair. The dialogue could have been started much earlier. Better late than never, though... right?)
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  7. #37
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    I hadn't thought about it that far, but I suppose he'd have to be top. I think his character might have personal issues with being penetrated, because that would involve more vulnerability than if he was the one doing the penetrating. James Bond is all about power, and not at all about vulnerability.
    Yeah. See to me, that makes more sense too, rather than just stating that Bond is no different whether he is straight or gay. I think the perception of Bond is definitely impacted if he's predominately a bottom, regardless of one's personal ethical views; it changes the nature of his character, which seems to be more invasive and penetrating than receptive.

    Edit: I think him being a bottom might work in the context of the other guy serving him sexually, though.
    I.e., he might be receptive but still in charge? That's a possibility.

    I think you nailed it when you mentioned "vulnerability" -- he's just not vulnerable. He can't afford to be. It goes against his nature and his function.

    The closest we saw in this iteration was his relationship with Vesper when he became emotionally vulnerable, and based on the outcome and his response to it, I doubt we will ever see a vulnerable Bond again as it gutted him. It made him harder, and it took him a lot to work through what bit of it he did. (All he told M in the end was that she "was right" [in saying he needed to forgive Vesper and that she did love him.]) And he was still very "masculine" and in charge even in that relationship, it was Vesper who became softer and more open and let him dominate despite being a strong woman herself.

    (I haven't seen most of the older Bond movies, but in recent ones, it seems like he usually has two love interests: one who's weaker than him and behaves like a prostitute, and one who is either his equal or almost his equal, who he flirts with but may or not actually have sex with during the movie.)
    That seems to be a fair assessment.

    And in neither of those cases is he really "vulnerable" to either -- in the first he definitely has an advantage, he's in control; and in the latter, he's with a like-minded woman, and they're just coming together (ha ha, punny!) for mutual pleasure and then departing after.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #38
    Riva
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    And yet, it's the SJ on this thread who isn't getting offended.
    You didn't get the point I was making at all did you? I wasn't implying anything about SJs, I was implying that the society has its own stereotypes, categories etc.

    And masculinity doesn't go hand in hand with homosexuality - vise versa - in our society. Maybe it will in the future as it did with the Greeks, but right now it doesn't.

    And I should add; going by the trend it wouldn't be long till society accepts/enjoys bi/homosexual heroes (example the main character in Torchwood and T-Bag from Prison break?). But James Bond is James Bond. Should his character be changed so that he fits in to the modern trends? Or should he be kept as he is - because it hasn't failed so far?

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    Your post is all about the gay/bisexual media stereotype, anyway, not the basic facts of sexual orientation.
    Yes it is. I don't get the latter. Please explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    If a man is gay or bisexual, that doesn't mean he has to be any less masculine than a straight man.
    Obviously so in practice but not so in image. I'm not saying their image, I'm saying the image the society has of them.

  9. #39
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    I think it would be great, and it would in no way make him less masculine to be bi or gay. The Greek gods are a good example. They pretty much had sex with everybody.

  10. #40
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riva View Post
    You didn't get the point I was making at all did you? I wasn't implying anything about SJs, I was implying that the society has its own stereotypes, categories etc.

    And masculinity doesn't go hand in hand with homosexuality - vise versa - in our society. Maybe it will in the future as it did with the Greeks, but right now it doesn't.

    And I should add; going by the trend it wouldn't be long till society accepts/enjoys bi/homosexual heroes (example the main character in Torchwood). But James Bond is James Bond. Should his character be changed so that he fits in to the modern trends? Or should he be kept as he is - because it hasn't failed so far?



    Yes it is. I don't get the latter. Please explain.



    Obviously so in practice but not so in image. I'm not saying their image, I'm saying the image the society has of them.
    Here's my thought: Who cares about society's image of it, when society's image is blatantly wrong? Yes, society sees gay men as always being effeminate, somehow. Yes, the media reinforces that. But both society and the media are incorrect. Even if there's a correlation, sometimes, it's not fair to the gay/bi community for all gay/bi men in the media to be effeminate, when that doesn't reflect the gay/bi community. (I mean, for god's sake, think of bear culture! They're about as rugged and macho as you can get!)

    So, my point is: You say that making James Bond gay or bi would be changing his character. I say that it wouldn't be. Only if you superimposed societal stereotypes on him, would he change. But the only thing that would truly change, would be who he wants to fuck (or who he wants to fuck him, depending on @Jennifer's and my verdict on Bond as a top/bottom).
    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Yeah. See to me, that makes more sense too, rather than just stating that Bond is no different whether he is straight or gay. I think the perception of Bond is definitely impacted if he's predominately a bottom, regardless of one's personal ethical views; it changes the nature of his character, which seems to be more invasive and penetrating than receptive.



    I.e., he might be receptive but still in charge? That's a possibility.

    I think you nailed it when you mentioned "vulnerability" -- he's just not vulnerable. He can't afford to be. It goes against his nature and his function.

    The closest we saw in this iteration was his relationship with Vesper when he became emotionally vulnerable, and based on the outcome and his response to it, I doubt we will ever see a vulnerable Bond again as it gutted him. It made him harder, and it took him a lot to work through what bit of it he did. (All he told M in the end was that she "was right" [in saying he needed to forgive Vesper and that she did love him.]) And he was still very "masculine" and in charge even in that relationship, it was Vesper who became softer and more open and let him dominate despite being a strong woman herself.



    That seems to be a fair assessment.

    And in neither of those cases is he really "vulnerable" to either -- in the first he definitely has an advantage, he's in control; and in the latter, he's with a like-minded woman, and they're just coming together (ha ha, punny!) for mutual pleasure and then departing after.
    +1, on all of this.

    Hypothetical scenario: in the next movie, his two love interests are both men, and he has a sex scene with each of them. I'm thinking that the only way to keep Bond, Bond, as we know him, would be to choose one of these options:

    1) He's a top with both of them, or
    2) He's a top with the man who's equal to him -- just to assert that he's still dominant/non-vulnerable despite the strength of the other man -- and he's a bottom with the weaker man, who is probably weaker and likely seduces him and provides him with sex as almost a sexual service/a distraction from the main plot.

    I think if he was a bottom with the stronger man, that would be too much like defeat, if that makes sense. Like surrender.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTJ] ENTJ's how many of you would consider yourself "social darwinists"?
    By The Great One in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-20-2012, 12:49 PM
  2. How many of you don't celebrate you birthdays?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 05-23-2010, 12:49 PM
  3. [INTJ] How many of you would like to see INTJ in tears ?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 01-06-2010, 12:23 AM
  4. How many of you don't have problems with nightmares?
    By Virtual ghost in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 04-28-2009, 10:37 PM
  5. [SJ] SJs : how many of you are Okay with factory-job?
    By niki in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-13-2008, 12:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO