#126
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:05pm
Excuse me, but why is having discussion with someone "Trying to drown them out"? Get over it.
Miss Saigon and racism — Page 6
#127
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:10pm
"Haterobics, I think that's a fairly interesting and noteworthy point, given the fact that we had actual Asian-Americans contributing to the discussion and a cabal of Caucasian Western European Males trying to drown them out. But whatevs."
Err, or you could read the comments in context and realize I was referring to the reaction to the Time magazine article and not this thread? Or whatevs.
Err, or you could read the comments in context and realize I was referring to the reaction to the Time magazine article and not this thread? Or whatevs.
#128
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:18pm
@haterbotics,
For me, outside the racial aspects (which I always find interesting), I found it interesting because it brought up some new things for me to think about that I didn't think of before. From my friends who liked and agreed with the article, my female friends (many of whom who are also white) found a sort of misogyny inherent when gay men take what they think are attributes of women and use them in exaggerated ways. They saw it as a sort of criticism and mockery of perceived feminine traits. My friends who are racial minorities (many of whom were men and many within that group were gay men) saw it as cultural appropriation, but also saw it as further mockery of black women that is perpetuated (most evident in reality shows and talk shows). My white gay friends that disagreed with the article (I have to put a condition as I have a few white gay men friends who agreed with the article) pointed that it was their valid expression. That they saw it as empowering and didn't understand why couldn't it be a part of their culture as well as another group who has been historically oppressed. They also thought black women didn't have a monopoly on many of the expressions and behavior the article was accusing white gay men of stealing. They thought it was a part of the broader gay culture and they have every right to it as well.
Luckily, a lot of my friends and their friends had a civil discussion, which didn't happen when anonymous people are having the debate in the comments section.
For me, outside the racial aspects (which I always find interesting), I found it interesting because it brought up some new things for me to think about that I didn't think of before. From my friends who liked and agreed with the article, my female friends (many of whom who are also white) found a sort of misogyny inherent when gay men take what they think are attributes of women and use them in exaggerated ways. They saw it as a sort of criticism and mockery of perceived feminine traits. My friends who are racial minorities (many of whom were men and many within that group were gay men) saw it as cultural appropriation, but also saw it as further mockery of black women that is perpetuated (most evident in reality shows and talk shows). My white gay friends that disagreed with the article (I have to put a condition as I have a few white gay men friends who agreed with the article) pointed that it was their valid expression. That they saw it as empowering and didn't understand why couldn't it be a part of their culture as well as another group who has been historically oppressed. They also thought black women didn't have a monopoly on many of the expressions and behavior the article was accusing white gay men of stealing. They thought it was a part of the broader gay culture and they have every right to it as well.
Luckily, a lot of my friends and their friends had a civil discussion, which didn't happen when anonymous people are having the debate in the comments section.
"I've got to get me out of here
This place is full of dirty old men
And the navigators and their mappy maps
And moldy heads and pissing on sugar cubes
While you stare at your books."
Updated On: 7/20/14 at 10:18 PM
#129
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:37pm
OK, but all you did was support the point I was making that people in online discussions just arrive and leave with the same opinion they already had before the discussion. One article brought together different factions to share their views, but they were the views they all individually had already, the article just gave them a reason to share them. I can't recall the last time I ever saw anyone in an online discussion just be like "You know, after reading all of these comments, I have been completely wrong about this issue all along."
#130
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:41pm
"From my friends who liked and agreed with the article, my female friends (many of whom who are also white) found a sort of misogyny inherent when gay men take what they think are attributes of women and use them in exaggerated ways."
Your friends are 1000% wrong about that. We do imitate them (or great actresses or brassy Broadway divas) because we admire it, we want to BE it. And it really isn't even imitation. Once we see it, it comes natural.
Your friends are 1000% wrong about that. We do imitate them (or great actresses or brassy Broadway divas) because we admire it, we want to BE it. And it really isn't even imitation. Once we see it, it comes natural.
#131
Posted: 7/20/14 at 10:48pm
@haterbotics,
Among strangers, that doesn't really happen often. Especially if the discussion is only through online article comments sections. However, among friends, I've seen discussions where people conceded points, realized they may have been too narrow-minded, or realized that they needed to re-think some things. It's hard when people naturally want to be right and have a little bit of knowledge at their disposal, but it can happen.
Plus, discussions can be useful just to challenge yourself and hear how you yourself can articulate your points better even if ultimately nobody changes their mind. And if you're not participating but just observing a well thought-out discussion, then you can maybe learn something (if not about the issue then at least about the nature of some of your friends).
Among strangers, that doesn't really happen often. Especially if the discussion is only through online article comments sections. However, among friends, I've seen discussions where people conceded points, realized they may have been too narrow-minded, or realized that they needed to re-think some things. It's hard when people naturally want to be right and have a little bit of knowledge at their disposal, but it can happen.
Plus, discussions can be useful just to challenge yourself and hear how you yourself can articulate your points better even if ultimately nobody changes their mind. And if you're not participating but just observing a well thought-out discussion, then you can maybe learn something (if not about the issue then at least about the nature of some of your friends).
"I've got to get me out of here
This place is full of dirty old men
And the navigators and their mappy maps
And moldy heads and pissing on sugar cubes
While you stare at your books."
Updated On: 7/20/14 at 10:48 PM
#132
Posted: 7/21/14 at 6:04pm
Viet... I appreciate your opinions and you comments. That being said, if we have an opinion (like I do) you seem to jump us for our opinions. I do love a valid debate. And You assume we all hide behind our "faceless nameless posts" -- My name is actually party of me and although I used my dog as a pic, I don't "hide" ---
"Whenever I get gloomy with the state of the world, I think about the arrivals gate at Heathrow Airport. General opinion's starting to make out that we live in a world of hatred and greed, but I don't see that. It seems to me that love is everywhere. Often it's not particularly dignified or newsworthy, but it's always there - fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, husbands and wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, old friends. When the planes hit the Twin Towers, as far as I know none of the phone calls from the people on board were messages of hate or revenge - they were all messages of love. If you look for it, I've got a sneaky feeling you'll find that love actually is all around."
#133
Posted: 7/21/14 at 7:43pm
Gaveston, I think you should see (or listen to) it regardless...
Sally, I did own the OBC recording on vinyl and never managed to turn it over the Side 2. I was going through a phase of extreme burnout with European poperettas.
But on your recommendation, I will absolutely download it and give it another listen. Thanks.
Sally, I did own the OBC recording on vinyl and never managed to turn it over the Side 2. I was going through a phase of extreme burnout with European poperettas.
But on your recommendation, I will absolutely download it and give it another listen. Thanks.
#134
Posted: 7/21/14 at 7:50pm
Excuse me, but why is having discussion with someone "Trying to drown them out"? Get over it.
I think the facetious posts re the racial inequities visited on white colonialists and the insistence that being gay automatically enables one to identify with all marginalized peoples is what the the original poster meant by "trying to drown out" the serious discourse of Asian-American posters.
The opposite would be to actually engage with such posters' ideas.
I think the facetious posts re the racial inequities visited on white colonialists and the insistence that being gay automatically enables one to identify with all marginalized peoples is what the the original poster meant by "trying to drown out" the serious discourse of Asian-American posters.
The opposite would be to actually engage with such posters' ideas.
#135
Posted: 7/21/14 at 7:55pm
1. Just because no poster announces she has changed her mind here doesn't prove that a seed wasn't planted that will change her mind in the future.
2. Like VIET, I often find that I understand my own thinking better when I am forced to condense my thinking for posting here.
3. There are always lurkers and we have no idea what they think. Wouldn't it be lovely if some Asian-Americans found posts here by VIET and Lizzie, et al., and decided to join?
2. Like VIET, I often find that I understand my own thinking better when I am forced to condense my thinking for posting here.
3. There are always lurkers and we have no idea what they think. Wouldn't it be lovely if some Asian-Americans found posts here by VIET and Lizzie, et al., and decided to join?
#136
Posted: 7/21/14 at 8:21pm
"That oped in Time Magazine prompted me to cancel my subscription. What stupid trash that was."
I know this prob should be in its own thread, but I can't resist briefly replying. It made me angry too--and when HuffPost Live TV had the author on the show, I felt actually a bit sympathetic--she seemed utterly out of her depth. Of course she raises some valid points, but I guess it was a college paper--and not one done with any actual research--that Time for some reason decided to publish and it went viral. It doesn't actually address any legit issues (and she does no favours by opening it up with a comment about white gay men all wanting to get raped by black men or something...)
This was by far the best response to the piece I read (even if they don't mention that someone like Beyonce probably wouldn't be as big a star as she is without the influence of gay culture on all aspects of her career...) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-michael-dagostino/bye-sierra-mannie-a-slightly-ang_b_5588108.html
OK back to the topic... (which I'm staying out of :P )
I know this prob should be in its own thread, but I can't resist briefly replying. It made me angry too--and when HuffPost Live TV had the author on the show, I felt actually a bit sympathetic--she seemed utterly out of her depth. Of course she raises some valid points, but I guess it was a college paper--and not one done with any actual research--that Time for some reason decided to publish and it went viral. It doesn't actually address any legit issues (and she does no favours by opening it up with a comment about white gay men all wanting to get raped by black men or something...)
This was by far the best response to the piece I read (even if they don't mention that someone like Beyonce probably wouldn't be as big a star as she is without the influence of gay culture on all aspects of her career...) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-michael-dagostino/bye-sierra-mannie-a-slightly-ang_b_5588108.html
OK back to the topic... (which I'm staying out of :P )
#137
Posted: 7/21/14 at 11:25pm
Gaveston, I think you'll like it, we seem to have similar tastes in music. It's no masterpiece, but I enjoy it a lot. I actually like it more than Les Miserables, mostly because it focus on one plotline, and we get to explore the characters more deeply. The score has some amazing songs; Movie In My Mind, I Still Believe, I'd Give My Life For You, You Will Not Touch Him, ect. Also, the music is interesting throughout: unlike SUNSET BOULEVARD, you're not waiting for the next power ballad to pull you out of endless elevator music. And, like I said, the performances are stellar all around. I also enjoy the Complete Symphonic recording, but the OLC is much better in terms of performances, and energy.
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
#138
Posted: 7/21/14 at 11:34pm
Right Eric she has the right to say what she wants, and I have the right to cancel my sub to Time over it. It was simply an uninformed opinion from someone who hasn't lived long enough to acquire any wisdom or knowledge of the world. I would argue that Time did her a disservice by publishing it.
#139
Posted: 7/21/14 at 11:34pm
Right Eric she has the right to say what she wants, and I have the right to cancel my sub to Time over it. It was simply an uninformed opinion from someone who hasn't lived long enough to acquire any wisdom or knowledge of the world. I would argue that Time did her a disservice by publishing it.
#140
Posted: 7/22/14 at 6:37am
Got it, Sally: original LONDON cast. Will do. Thanks again.
#141
Posted: 7/22/14 at 9:29am
Heart eyes for GavestonPS!
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#142
Posted: 7/22/14 at 8:19pm
You are too kind, Lizzie. I think. I actually don't know what "heart eyes" are.
Oh, do you mean i's dotted with little hearts? I'm not hung up on machismo, but, no, I don't draw any little pictures when I write. I've also eschewed pink and purple markers. LOL.
I think we should all go see a good production of Hwang's M. BUTTERFLY and then start this conversation again. (That play changed my life by literally rewiring my brain.) I'm not saying we would all suddenly agree, just that we'd have a great foundation for an argument.
***
As long as I'm posting random stuff, I think the assertion above that men do drag because they want to be women is specious. Maybe that's the motivation of some drag performers; I haven't taken a poll.
But drag itself is a form of camp, a highly exaggerated imitation of reality. And as Hwang points out, what is being imitated is not women themselves but male constructions of feminity. Dismissing drag as misogynistic is a fair choice, I suppose (since male views of women are inherently biased). Personally, I think it has its place as a form of entertainment.
It's easy to equate drag and blackface or yellow face, but the difference is that drag performers grow up in close proximity to women (and male ideas about women), while other races are all too often viewed from afar.
Oh, do you mean i's dotted with little hearts? I'm not hung up on machismo, but, no, I don't draw any little pictures when I write. I've also eschewed pink and purple markers. LOL.
I think we should all go see a good production of Hwang's M. BUTTERFLY and then start this conversation again. (That play changed my life by literally rewiring my brain.) I'm not saying we would all suddenly agree, just that we'd have a great foundation for an argument.
***
As long as I'm posting random stuff, I think the assertion above that men do drag because they want to be women is specious. Maybe that's the motivation of some drag performers; I haven't taken a poll.
But drag itself is a form of camp, a highly exaggerated imitation of reality. And as Hwang points out, what is being imitated is not women themselves but male constructions of feminity. Dismissing drag as misogynistic is a fair choice, I suppose (since male views of women are inherently biased). Personally, I think it has its place as a form of entertainment.
It's easy to equate drag and blackface or yellow face, but the difference is that drag performers grow up in close proximity to women (and male ideas about women), while other races are all too often viewed from afar.
Updated On: 7/22/14 at 08:19 PM
#143
Posted: 7/22/14 at 8:25pm
I think it was more about men (not dressed as women) thinking it's cool to act like sassy black women. Or something--it's a confusing argument...
#144
Posted: 7/22/14 at 8:30pm
I cancelled my subscription to TIME years ago over their giving Charles Krauthammer a column, so I didn't see the exchange in question.
I was just speaking of drag in general and a post that made claims in those terms.
(This really needs its own thread, but I would argue that black women doing the "strong black woman stereotype" are actually performing in drag themselves. To be fair, I'd say the same about many "macho" men.)
I was just speaking of drag in general and a post that made claims in those terms.
(This really needs its own thread, but I would argue that black women doing the "strong black woman stereotype" are actually performing in drag themselves. To be fair, I'd say the same about many "macho" men.)
Updated On: 7/22/14 at 08:30 PM
#145
Posted: 7/22/14 at 8:43pm
Yeah that Time column thing was infuriating and insulting. But not nearly as upsetting as what Colleen Dewhurst did to Jonathan Pryce.
#146
Posted: 7/22/14 at 9:06pm
"Yeah that Time column thing was infuriating and insulting. But not nearly as upsetting as what Colleen Dewhurst did to Jonathan Pryce."
What happened with Colleen Dewhurst and Jonathan Pryce? Perhaps you can do a few dozen posts and tell us about it. Be sure to include as much detail as possible about what you thought of it and how it made you feel.
What happened with Colleen Dewhurst and Jonathan Pryce? Perhaps you can do a few dozen posts and tell us about it. Be sure to include as much detail as possible about what you thought of it and how it made you feel.
#147
Posted: 7/22/14 at 9:34pm
Oh Fisherman Bob, you are an absolute panic!
The details of the conflict are readily available on the internet for those who are interested.
Thank goodness great people like John Malkovich threatened to resign from Actor's Equity if Pryce was not allowed to perform.
Pryce v Dewhurst
The details of the conflict are readily available on the internet for those who are interested.
Thank goodness great people like John Malkovich threatened to resign from Actor's Equity if Pryce was not allowed to perform.
Pryce v Dewhurst
#148
Posted: 7/23/14 at 12:59am
"Your friends are 1000% wrong about that. We do imitate them (or great actresses or brassy Broadway divas) because we admire it, we want to BE it. And it really isn't even imitation. Once we see it, it comes natural."
So, you want to be a sassy black woman is basically what you're saying here.
So, you want to be a sassy black woman is basically what you're saying here.
#149
Posted: 7/23/14 at 1:02am
1) Why on earth would anyone subscribe to Time?
2) "...and she does no favours by opening it up with a comment about white gay men all wanting to get raped by black men or something…". Well...
2) "...and she does no favours by opening it up with a comment about white gay men all wanting to get raped by black men or something…". Well...
Twitter @NamoInExile
Instagram none
#150
Posted: 7/23/14 at 1:10am
"So, you want to be a sassy black woman is basically what you're saying here."
Not per se. But I do enjoy and admire watching a strong woman take care of business, as it were. Be it Helen Lawson or Pearl Bailey- it's fun and I find myself using the vernacular of those kinds of gals. And it isn't making fun of them, it's celebrating their wonderfulness!
Not per se. But I do enjoy and admire watching a strong woman take care of business, as it were. Be it Helen Lawson or Pearl Bailey- it's fun and I find myself using the vernacular of those kinds of gals. And it isn't making fun of them, it's celebrating their wonderfulness!
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95