Question about the story to Brokeback Mountain (2005).

I don't know if I should put a warning or not since my question has do with the sexuality of the characters and their sex lives.

But I watched this movie with my friend. He's seen it before back when it came out and liked it, where as this is my first time watching it.

So I watched the movie and we had a disagreeing debate about the story, in the sense that he thought that the two main characters in the movie were homosexual, where as I thought they were bisexual.

The reason why I thought this was because they didn't seem to have any problems getting sexually aroused by their wives in the movie. But my friend totally disagreed and felt they were 100% homosexual, he said.

But what do you think? Did I interpret it wrong?

Physical sexual arousal and sexual attraction are not the same thing.

It's very common for gays and lesbians to have heterosexual intercourse at some point, especially early on in their lives. This is typically either because they have not yet fully realized and accepted their sexuality or because they were consciously trying to hide it. However, I've known gay and lesbian people who occasionally have heterosexual sex because they think it's fun, but they have no actual attraction to the other person. In terms of the film, I think It's also important to note that it's set in a time and place where being openly gay is a much more dangerous thing than it is today so the drive to appear "normal" would be stronger in their situation.

But to answer your question, I think the sexuality of Ennis may be a bit open for interpretation, but it's pretty clear to me that Jack is gay.

__________________

That’s just bizarre. People like that might have sex with your furniture, your car or even animals. If they want sex with anything that’s not attractive. I don’t see the point in having sex with someone you’re not attracted to. I wouldn’t find it fun, at least.

well, that escalated quickly
I live in what was once known as the gay capital of the UK, it's pretty common for people who identify as gay to have the occasional hetero experience. I think sexuality is such a complex subject, everyone is different, the nature vs nurture arguement still rages (peacefully) exposure is a factor, knew a guy that was married for 20odd years that had no doubts about his sexuality, after moving here (in his words) his mind was opened. He and his ex wife are were best friends at that time

__________________
can i have one of those buttons?

I do believe gay people can have straight sex, but wouldn’t it be better with someone you feel attracted to? I mean, you MUST feel something for them if you go all the way, right? Otherwise it might as well be necrophilia - sex with any old inanimate, unattractive object.

not always, check any agony aunt column and there's stories of married couples that aren't attracted to each other anymore trying to get the spark back etc, ok it's not quite the same thing but you know what I mean

I don't think you need to be attracted to the person to have sex. Some people just need sex and they'll do it with anyone, attractive or not.

I think Ennis is gay, doesn't he turn his wife around to have sex, mimicking his time with Jake? It's been a long time since I saw it, but I feel like he is more into it when it was doggystyle.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

did we meet during my 20's?

I really think ironpony is gonna come out of this much more confused.

Yeah he turned his wife around, but he was still able to get aroused by her, with hardly any problems it seems, as Jake was also able to get aroused by his wife, no problem it seems, and there are no scenes where it's actually challenging for them, so I figured they were bisexual.

Now I know it was set in a time when a lot of homosexual people pretended to be straight to be accepted, that makes sense... it's just these two men were able to conform to it so easily, so I felt they were bisexual because it was so easy for them.

I mean if they were meant to be written as gay, then why didn't the filmmakers show it as an actual challenge for them to try to be straight as well?

Rolling a woman over is hardly showing it as a challenge.

It is so hot reading you talk about gay doggystyle.

The failing marriages and deaths of the soul not do it for ya?

(Yeah, I know how that sounded.)

They were “straight” out of fear. They were afraid to be gay, as many guys are.

They did women cause they had to.

When Ennis did a backdoor on Michelle Williams, or whoever it was, he was pretending she was Jake Gyllenhaal. I would probably do the same thing.

They’re bisexual in practice, straight to the public, and gay behind very closed doors. It’s a rainbow of sexualities. Doesn’t really matter, anyway.

I didn't think the marriage failed because of homosexuality, I felt they failed cause Ennis and Jake had more chemistry with each other, than their wives. I thought they were bi and could prefer either gender, but liked each other more cause the chemistry was better.

I just felt that if they were gay but pretending to be straight, they would have a much harder time pretending, like not being able to get erections with their women, and trying to have sex, but then it would gross them out so much that they would be going to the toilet and throwing up, or something like that.

I mean I saw another movie where a guy found out that the woman he was hooking up with was actually a man, and he went to the toilet and threw up when he found out, so I thought that if Jake and Ennis were truely gay, they would be reacting like that with women, and feeling that uneasy about it.

And in real life something similar happened to me one time, and I did the same thing where I had a complete loss of sexual appetite, as a real life example.

There was no loss of sexual appetite when they were with the women. I just feel that if they were gay, why not show more of a challenge of being straight then turning a woman over and that's it?

Hoo boy.

but that's kinda the point of the film right? the inner conflict about their sexualities? there's not a switch that just makes everything easy

But I did feel it was portrayed as being too easy and not enough conflict though.

This is why I felt they were bisexual, cause of they were gay, the conflict would be much, much higher I feel. This article here also talks about how they were bisexual and not gay, but for some reason, a lot of viewers think they are gay:

https://pages.shanti.virginia.edu/Ne...back-mountain/

if they were going for realism, it would be 47 hours long lol

No I think they could show them struggle with their sexuality more and still have the movie be just as long, the sex scenes with the women were written differently, but with the same amount of length.

Here’s my suggestion, ironpony: write a decades sprawling romantic epic about an explicitly bisexual cowboy and another one who’s explicitly homosexual. You show the emotional and physical hurdles they encounter throughout their relationship, including feeling repulsion, apparently, towards the opposite sex in the case of the explicitly homosexual character. Together they endure the tests of time and societal oppression, and individually deconstruct the deeply ingrained notions of the American masculine identity.

Oh, and the title? “The Iron Pony.”