The problem was that, if he (or any critic) were referring to a straight romance where the male pursued the female ardently and in the style common to strait romances (and such advances were well received by the pursued), said male would never have been referred to as a sexual predator.

To refer to a gay male as a sexual predator for merely pursuing his potential partner ardently, but in the manner common to gay romances (with such advances well received by the pursued) is to apply a double standard to gays that is an insult and a defamation of our method of courtship and sexual relations.



.

I'm not sure it's as much an application of a double standard as an attempt to apply one standard to all types, and this common behavior. We see things through our own lens. Shalit was coming at it from his POV, in which such behavior would be considered somewhat preditory. I don't agree with his assessment, but it registered to me as ignorance more than insult.

All I can say is that if I hadn't met a Jake in my life, I'd still be in the closet like good 'ol Ennis. Married and un-freakin-happy...
:)

OK. I get it now, Ism. Thanks.

This cat LOVED the movie:

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2690572?htv=12&htv=12