ZestVlog

The title of this film short should be-

Beware Of Older Bottoms Looking For Young Well Hung Tops!

John Waters hasn't changed a bit!

R1- It does seem like a John Waters satire.

Is there a version with nudity?

What was anal hygiene like in this low-tech era?

I want to watch what happened to Mike Merrick? Did the Homosexualist have his way with him? DIRTY, I need to see the film

Bet the cop was a closet case

De Santis’s campaign should colorize this and pass it off as their next ad.

Where is that toilet block and pier?

"Beware of Homosexuals!" - The Reboot

Starring Hollywood heartthrob Richard Madden as the notoriously well-endowed dangerous Daddy, and twink sensation Froy Gutierrez as his hole-starved insatiable boy-lover.

Written by Bruce Vilanch. Produced by Ron DeSantis. Directed by John Waters. Distributed by Disney.

We used to call that the Fag Movie!

Yeah, I remember this film

This little Jimmy needs to fasten his seatbelt!

Jimmy was put on probation?!

Homosexuality was illegal at the time.

But Jimmy was the victim!

The viewer comments are also from 1961, apparently.

Thank you for the warning R17.

This film needs the Mystery Science Theater 3000 treatment.

Beware of Homosexual - they hate fats and fems!

There's also a 1973 color remake titled 'Boys Aware.'

Were these shown in schools?

Lil Jimmy should have known that dude was sus and I don’t mean downlow. Why the fuck is he in the passenger seat and then scoots over. Where they do that at even in 1961?

Jodie Foster became a dyke because she got in that taxi.

How’d they get Rod Sterling to narrate this?

The homosexual DEMANDS a relationship with members of the same sex?

The 1973 version looks like it was directed by Gus Van Sant.

R28 Thank you. I was trying to figure out what about this seemed so familiar. That’s it’s exactly what is. Like old reruns of Twilight Zone. I stopped watching halfway thru the basketball predator; did they reveal that homosexuals come from Mars?

The 1980 version has a porno-funk soundtrack:

R22- The boy in the 1973 version is much more attractive than the boy in 1961.

[quote]How’d they get Rod Sterling to narrate this?

Oh, dear.

The people who pushed this shit in those days are basically today’s anti-trans freaks / psychos that talk nonstop about “grooming” etc

R35 Dayum. But I’m not anti trans and only really talk about them here on DL. They just seem so ungrounded.

But I wanted to see the kid get gang banged, then eat clam.

The gang rape scene setup in the 1980 version was extremely disturbing. Did they have to go that far? At least they included a frau and didn’t single out gay men as perpetrators.

And that kids, is how I met your father.

That was BORING!! I wanted the sexy 80's black guy say to the kid"U had a tight hole but it couldn't last forever" My name is Wayne Williams visiting from Atlanta, let me drive u home!

Bryan Singer is shooketh.

R40 The black dude was hot. I could have easily been the victim in that scenario.

I'm pretty sure MTG is working on a remake.

R35, homophobia was mainstream in those days and if you were out professionally, you lost your job. Blackmail of gay men mostly was an acceptable way to earn some extra income among local law enforcement and courts.

Educate yourself R35. The virulent prejudice toward the trans community is a much smaller although loud phenom. It exists in all its disgusting glory here on DL as well- I suspect a very small number, but they are as vocal as they are repugnant.

I'd seen this film before:

1. on one level absurd anachronistic hilarity - on another level representative of the bigotry that once (and again) cloaked itself in the unquestioned connection between homosexuality and pedophilia.

2. I guess this couldn't be shown in Florida schools... don't say gay, eh?

3. I never quite got it in seeing this before... the first kid was put on probation? Huh? What was his crime? Did it hint that they actually did fuck on the fishing trip? Was riding in a car with a known homo a crime? Bizarre. Bigotry, beyond the damage to humans, is just so fucking quirky and reality-challenged.

Now do a video where straight guys pick up little girls, because that’s what happens most.

R45 yes that’s implied. His crime was sodomy.

To R42, I "dated" that type of Black man in the early 80's. They were "always married or Loved Pussy" but were really HORNY!!

Really str8 acting black guys, no femme queens or "I'm Bi" type of Black guys in the 1980's. Femme queens were the Drag show performers in the 1980's that I saw-had the best eyebrows.

It’s interesting how public bathrooms are a danger zone In Boys Beware 1961, but back then the onus was put on children and parents to be aware of their surroundings, and to be on the lookout for molesters, rather than the government legislating bathroom safety by banning gay men from public spaces, or requiring “children only” bathrooms. I think it’s because most gay men were closeted and undetectable back then, and also there were existing laws against sexual assault that applied to ALL spaces, including bathrooms. That may be why America didn’t go full Jim Crow against gay people and require that they stay out of “straight” bathrooms.

Strangely, public bathrooms are again considered a higher risk than, say, staying alone with an uncle; being an alter boy; or participating in a sports field trip with adult coaches; but this time it’s trans people instead of black people or gay men who are the number 1 threat. It’s funny how the “men sharing bathrooms with boys” dilemma resolved itself, but now drag performers and trans people need to be eliminated from public life for the sake of the children. It always starts with the bathrooms!

R45 I think there's a shot of Jimmy going to a motel with the man, it's implied they made the beast with two backs, as Shakespeare might say

Jimmy got probation because he was a prostitution whore.

R45. My Shakespeare teacher loved to tell about the student who, in a paraphrase paper, said Othello and Desdemona “rode a camel together.”

I saw it…it didn’t take…who knew ?!?

Lol r52. Jimmy was playing coy from the very beginning. He knew about that life and wanted some extra coins to buy a new sweater for the spring dance.

The Goys were murdered because the shooter was Jimaaay’s secret lover.

Someone create a thread.

Let’s be Jimmy’s Life since 1961.

R44: same shit, different color / day.

You should educate yourself, too:

I don’t know why I can’t stop laughing at r52. Every time I read it. It’s so dead on and can play both ways. Hysterical.

R62 I think whoever mashed that up is............... a homosexual.

They need to do a remake where they warn male models about Peter Thiel

Why do you always repost this every year? Last year it was posted by the same exact user.

R65 Perhaps OP was traumatized from youth and suffers from PTSD.

I'm bringing those days back!

[quote]It’s funny how the “men sharing bathrooms with boys” dilemma resolved itself, but now drag performers and trans people need to be eliminated from public life for the sake of the children. It always starts with the bathrooms!

‘Trans women’ are men. If trans-identifying men feel unsafe in men’s lavatories then they can campaign for third spaces instead of forcing women and girls to share spaces with them.

There is no legitimate reason for an adult man to use a public lavatory alongside women and girls. A man who presents in gender non-conforming ways is still a man and his presentation does not alter the risk he presents to women and girls. Any man determined to use spaces reserved for women and children who are in states of undress or otherwise vulnerable is a sexual predator irrespective of his gender identity. Subjective feeling states (how one identifies) should not take precedence over the material reality that there are two sexes, and one sex is more physically vulnerable than the other.

R68 is a bathroom obsessive. Probably a GOP pedo who projects his lust for kids onto trans people

R66 yeah, so he keeps posting the same threads over and over? Makes sense…

In the 1973 version, the first boy to be molested is taken to the police station, arrested and released on probation to his parents. WTF?

Feel bad for all the 60s and 70s gaylings who had to watch that shit growing up

I'm glad I watched that film. I didn't realize homosexuality was "contagious".

Apparently someone needs to develop a vaccine to prevent it.

^ Since Republicans refuse to be vaccinated, I guess they'll all turn gay!

r69 Trans people don't even belong in this discussion because what they're trying to do now (as r68 so clearly illustrated) is nothing like what gays and lesbians went through when this production was distributed/aired. Trying to conflate the two is just an insult to gays and lesbians.

There are whole straight men in dresses "demanding" to be referred to as lesbians and allowed into private female changing areas, and morons like r69 scream "bigot" to the sane individuals speaking out against that foolishness.

R75, the same conservatives screaming about trans people are the ones who fought gay rights every step of the way. And as for "straight men in dresses"....I thought you guys said all trans people were gays who couldn't handle being gay?

How would you feel if homophobic straight men said gays should have separate bathrooms because the think gays will prey on them?

You fuckers have to drag trans people into every thread, even ones that aren't about them.

[quote][R75], the same conservatives screaming about trans people are the ones who fought gay rights every step of the way.

It's not just conservatives raising concerns. That is a radical TRA propagandist talking point and you know this. No matter how hard you try to push the lie that it's only conservatives concerned about issues such as biological males being allowed in female spaces, it will never be the truth, and it will not force those of us in the community to stop speaking out against it. Bet on that.

[quote]How would you feel if homophobic straight men said gays should have separate bathrooms because the think gays will prey on them?

This is a terrible example. Biological males and females already have separate bathrooms. There are biological males who want to enter female bathrooms with impunity just because they "say" they're females when they are not. That is not nearly the same fucking thing. Gay males belong in the men's bathroom. Males, gay or straight, do not belong in female bathrooms. Period.

[quote]You fuckers have to drag trans people into every thread, even ones that aren't about them.

Actually, it's YOU fuckers who brought the trans up in this thread. You are correct. This is a gay issue and has nothing to do with them. So, go talk to your people upthread starting at r35 and ask them why they decided to bring up trans when this isn't about trans and never was.

The point is that gay men would have probably been banned from bathrooms and other public spaces if they were visibly gay, similar to black people being segregated during Jim Crow, or Japanese Americans being mass-incarcerated at Manzanar during WWII. But back in the Eisenhower era, gay men didn’t stand out; most blended in with straight men. So instead of banning them from public spaces, homosexual acts were criminalized and poor little Jimmy was arrested along with his abuser because the government couldn’t take proactive measures; it was HIS responsibility to avoid the sexual encounter. (Female rape and molestation victims were treated with similar disregard — if the perpetrators were white males.)

r78 And as true and horrible as all of that is, none of it has fuck all to do with trans people no matter how hard they and their unhinged activists try to claim otherwise. If gay men were banned from men's restrooms for being gay, it would've been wrong. Men being banned from women's restrooms for being the men that they are is common sense and not wrong. Again, your comparisons are terrible.

"It's not just conservatives raising concerns."

Yes, it is. Conservatives and high school dropouts who don't know any better. Studies show highly educated people are more likely to support trans rights, just like they are more like to support gay rights. And abortion rights. I'm proud to be on the same side as highly educated liberals, you're on the same side as the people who are always wrong on social issues.

"And as true and horrible as all of that is, none of it has fuck all to do with trans people no matter how hard they and their unhinged activists try to claim otherwise."

The unhinged ones are your pals who are destroying merchandise at Target just because they acknowledge that trans people exist

r80 Nice smokescreen attempt. I also love the disingenuous touch with mentioning the Target issue. Nothing you said has anything to do with being against biological males entering female spaces.

[quote]Studies show highly educated people are more likely to support trans rights

Studies also show a difference between males and females. Somehow, the "highly educated" bunch you're referencing must've missed that day in class. They should fight for their own bathrooms and spaces. Not force their way into female spaces. Sex segregation can and should be maintained for safety reasons.

I think all that bathroom laws really “do” is stigmatize trans people as dangerous perverts, rather than protect women from actual rape. If protecting women were the number one concern in America, why are there over 100,000 untested rape kits gathering dust in evidence lockers? Thousands of perps free to re-offend after brief (if any) prison sentences? Women and little girls who are being forced, in some states, to give birth to their rapist’s babies? If laws that are supposed to “protect” women are being ignored, so will the bathroom bills, so pee where you feel comfortable, trans people!

[quote]on another level representative of the bigotry that once (and again) cloaked itself in the unquestioned connection between homosexuality and pedophilia.

I don't mean to give the bigots of yore the benefit of the doubt, but did society at large in the pre-modern gay rights era even have the vocabulary and the awareness that those were two different things? Obviously the modern conception of homosexuality was around in academia since European sexologists came up with it in the 19th century already, and that formulation then spread throughout the Western world. But the common folk, did they understand the difference back in the early '60s when this film was produced?

R84, that is the 'women are getting raped and assaulted anyway, so we might as well allow men who say they're women to use women's spaces whenever they want' argument. All that it does is make women less safe.

You don't care about women's safety, Republicans. You care more about fetuses than women.

Would somebody [italic][bold]please[/bold][/italic] shit in my mouth?

What troll has turned this thread into a trans-slam-fest?

[quote]I don't mean to give the bigots of yore the benefit of the doubt, but did society at large in the pre-modern gay rights era even have the vocabulary and the awareness that those were two different things?

I think there was little awareness of pedophilia and ephebophilia until the 80s, when child sexual abuse became a moral panic. Especially when it came to adults attracted to adolescents, which wasn’t exactly a perversion in the public consciousness during the 50s and 60s because the age of consent for girls was as low as 14 in some states. So while older men in relationships with adolescent girls were thought to have, at worst, “stunted sexuality,” men into adolescent boys were considered to have the more serious condition of “malformed sexual orientation” that was considered dangerous because it was thought to confuse the sexual orientation of boys subjected to it, turning them into future homosexuals. That’s why Jimmy gets probation in the video — pedophilia was not the crime; homosexuality was.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7pa3TmqOorZ6csm%2BvzqZmraCimq6le5JrcHJvZmiDbq7EsJirnV2ks260zqamrJ2oqq6tv4xaZGpxZmY%3D