This has nothing to do with the discussion really, but as somebody that doesn't really care too much about dancey electropop (I love stuff like Soft Cell and Thrill Kill Kult, but that's pretty distantly related; Lady Gaga is boring for me), and a pretty snobby person when it comes to consumable "art," Lady Gaga is about a billion times more interesting than most of the pap on the radio that this thread is really about, like the boy bands, or the endless "alternative" crap peddled by big labels in the second half of the 90s.
That said, crap is easy to like if you don't care. If you don't care about music, you probably aren't going to like Caroliner or Coil. If you don't care about film, you probably aren't going to be watching Satyricon or El Topo. If you don't care about visual art, you'll probably have some goofy landscapes on a calendar instead of an Otto Dix or Paul Klee. If you don't care about literature, you probably aren't going to read Turgenev or William Burroughs. You can like mindless nonsense and still care (I still dig Aqua and Sin With Sebastian {I guess I was mistaken when I said I don't like that sort of thing?!} and lots of completely braindead metal.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
If you are into music, you necessarily won't like Coil or Caroliner either. Its like declaring all food lovers are those who should appreciated chocolate covered bone marrow. Its just as easy to assault all those examples you've listed as it is to defend them.
You can hate the "meaningful" content and still care about the medium.
Obviously it was just an example, but people that don't give a serious damn about music are never going to even hear Caroliner, because that isn't the sort of thing you just stumble across. An American food lover might not like natto or sheep's kidneys, but somebody that doesn't care about food probably will never try them (or hear of them, in natto's case).
God DAMN I love Caroliner.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
How's about y'all just step back and take a deep breath?
I totally agree, let's do that.
We're definitely not gonna get anywhere the way this is going right now. So I'll make the first move in trying to step back a bit. And maybe even hopefully get back to what we were originally talking about.
I'll try one last time to address the whole "you're a bigot" issue as clearly as I possibly can.
While I understand it can in interpreted that by taking a shot at Lady Gaga by calling her a man, that I'm trying to imply that there's something wrong with being transgendered. I assure you that wasn't my intention.
As I've said many times before here, I am in full support of people being allowed to express themselves and live however they see fit and I think it's great when people can be themselves in the face of diversity.
I'd certainly admit it was at worse a cheap pot shot. But if I'm a bigot for saying that, so is everyone who's ever taken part in a celebrity roast. Those things are choc full of racist, sexist and all sorts of other nasty jokes, but would would say the comedians on there are genuinely racist or are they just busting eachother's balls?
I don't really know what more I can say to clear that up. I would like a lil more info on what you meant by "playing the victim card" as I can't for the life of me even begin to understand how you came to that conclusion.
Regarding me being insulting. Unless I've missed something, I haven't directly attacked anyone other than Lady Gaga. I however have been reduced to nothing more than a bigot. And this is with people knowing nothing of my personal views outside of the fact that I'm not a fan of Lady Gaga.
Although I've said before that I don't think that "mass media influence" is the one and only reason people are fans of her music, I do feel it's a relevant issue. And that this issue plays a large part in many people's opinions.
Something I've tried to bring up multiple times here, but have had disregarded was my inquiries about the Furry subculture. Although I'm not part of this subculture myself, it does seem that it's a lot more acceptable to give flack to furries, despite them essentially being in a similar boat of "just trying to live life in the way that feels right for them". And I can't help but think that that's largely due to how there's really not been much fed to people to make them feel otherwise. I'm not accusing anyone here of feeling exactly this way, but I think it's something to consider. Or even take into consideration any other group of people with "extremely unconventional" sexual interests. Are you truly accepting of every person's interests? And I'm specifically talking interests that would involve consenting adults where no one is being harmed. Do you accept all these various tastes, or are their exceptions to what you think is okay regarding this? I personally do accept and tolerate ANYTHING that consenting adults wish to do in the privacy of their own home, providing it's not harming or involving anyone who doesn't want to be involved.
There's lots of things in this culture that people take offense too that seems contradictory when applied to something else. If a black comedian were to have a long bit about how he things white people are stuck-up or can't dance or how they all look the same to him, people would laugh right along with him. If a white comedian were to use this EXACT same material, yet simply replace the white with black. He'd be ruined. He'd be forced to appear on every talk show for the next few months apologizing over and over again just so he could fade into obscurity, hopefully in peace.
I concede that this is a bit off subject, but it's an example of what I'm speaking of when I say people's opinions (not everyone here mind you) can indeed be a bit too largely shaped by what they're told they can and cannot feel.
As for Lady Gaga herself, you're all more than welcome to feel how you feel about her. If you look back, I'm not and never was actually attacking anyone for liking her (seriously, go look back at all the times I said people are free to like what they like, I'll wait......). I feel differently and I have every right to feel that way for whatever reason I choose to. It doesn't make me right or you wrong, it just means I have different taste. And that is indeed essentially what I've been saying from the start. If I've personally offended anyone, I can even be the big man and apologize for that. I stand behind what I said, but if you were offended, that wasn't my intention.
Let's ban Lady Gaga from this thread and make it about the abomination that is popular hip hop instead...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
If this forum had Greasers, Phoenix, Commons and Semantics would be the leaders of the gang and every time they commented on something they would do a synchronized finger snap then smoke a cigarette.
I rely can't understand how simply by adding complexity to music it becomes better. If we take other mediums such as visual art or food often times additions of complexity takes away from what you are trying to accomplish. I can dig new and unique sounds being new or unique doesn't make your music good just as using a tried and true formula doesn't mean the music you made is bad all it means is that your not very innovative. Musics primary use is to entertain, thus the way you measure quality is by how entertained you where by said music, if you enjoy complex music then listen to it if you need a message then find some music with a message if you want music with an enjoyable beat you can dance to then put it on.
But to answer why people look down on people that like different music then there selves, it has more to do with human psychology and the way we form and recognize peer groups than the music itself.
Everyone is a food lover just some love food more then others and those that don't like good are often times dead <,<
It doesn't. The Stooges and The Ramones ☺☺☺☺ all over most noodly nonsense for everybody except music nerds (and they like Dream Theater, so I don't trust them), but like with anything, different music styles have different purposes. People that only listen to one style of music confound me.
I agree with the sentiment that art that does not exist to transcend or communicate some inner truth or whatever you want to call it is just diversion or decoration, though. Obviously what accomplishes that goal is different for everybody. I listen to a pretty huge range of music (at work the other day, when I had control of the ipod dock, we listened to Tuvan throat singing, Dead Prez, a gamelan orchestra, Alice Coltrane, GG Allin, Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel {he does the music for The Venture Bros for those that don't know!}, Husker Du, Psychic TV, and The Butthole Surfers... I'm weird), and I often use different types of music as very easy ways to invoke various emotions or mental states.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
I understand the idea of opinions and objectivism, but there has to be a line drawn; and that line is drawn when you're saying that a talentless entertainer - which, again, is the basis of his fame in the first place - is a better musician than two musicians who, with their influence, changed the course of music forever.
Well, I know a lot of people who would pick an entertainer's music over any classical anytime. And that's what I'm asking: why do people like music "without quality"?
You say there has to be a line drawn... but where, how, why?
Why don't we change the vibe a little, because the current approach might have a propensity for causing defensiveness.
Why don't we each talk about things we personally like that most other people seem to think is crap, and talk about exactly why we like it? We can get more earnest viewpoints about why we like the stuff that has the 'crap' label.
I have much better examples, but I'm in a hurry, so I'll say this: I love Taco bell. I know it's crap mexican food (it's not even mexican food). It's highly unoriginal and unauthentic. It's not good for me at all as far as I know.
I like the taste of this crappy food, and sometimes I just get a craving for it. Their cheese-whizzy stuff they put on their deep fried Chalupas, and even their lame little hard and soft tacos. The salsa from those little condiment packets, I can't smother enough of the stuff.
I don't think they're successful because of their advertising. Though their commercials give them exposure (esp. the cute dog), I dont' think the commercials make me think that Taco bell is cool to eat or anything. I don't think I go there because the commercial tells me to run for the border. That Chalupa dog was cute though, so maybe I was brainwashed.
I think go there because I know exactly what I'm going to get and there is consistency to their food (key for any fast food franchise which is why McDonald's is so popular), there is a nice sodium and fat content and flavor profile to their food, and the chances that their food will make me sick is much lower than any other franchise place that serves tacos with lettuce and tomato bits on the east coast.
Maybe that's not a good example of true 'crap', but I will think harder while I go work.
Said perfectly by the man with a pic of a dude rockin out with the emphasis of the photo on his junk.
And? My avatar's a bit from a music video satirizing the typical "dancing ho" routine in rap/hiphop videos by replacing the girls with guys. The objectification role-reversal is a huge part of the point. The other being sexy dancing guys. I'm not sure how that relates to or contradicts my earlier point since Salvation has never to my knowledge taken a hard stance against appreciating hot people so long as the imagery remains work safe and the associated commentary doesn't become lewd or crass.
It's not embarrassing, immature or indecent to have a hot guy (who's not nude) dancing in an avatar.
Take these things into consideration. The topic clearly changed from "Why do people like crap" to "Why do people like Lady Gaga". Which admittedly is funny within itself.
However, on any other occasion, we all know MikeyG would have been on everyone's ass to "Stay on topic or infractions will be dealt out". Yet, this time somehow, the topic is allowed to run it's course.
Yup, it's all because I'm biased and clearly against you and not because I'm busy working doubles and getting holiday stuff done. Fantastic.
And for the record, debating the artistic merits of a particular musical artist in a thread debating the relative objectivity of musical quality isn't all that off-topic. The whole Gaga=man crap was, but at no point did it really threaten to dominate the thread and derail it anyway so as long as the bulk of the thread stayed the course and no one got too heated, I probably wouldn't have had to course correct the thread.
I rely can't understand how simply by adding complexity to music it becomes better.
There's nothing "simple" about it, and as you rightly point out, if you do it haphazardly, it makes the art far worse. But a piece of art that is perfectly complex fully engages the senses, without overwhelming or distracting them, and leads them all towards appreciation of the single unified whole. Remove some complexity from such a piece, and you do diminish it. The genius of a great composer like Bach lies not in his complexity - any boob can make complex music - but rather in his selecting the right complexity.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
@Phoenix: I damn well am, are you still insisting on dodging it? How is it any less on topic than us going back and forth about the transgendered community? As far as I know, the original topic was "Why do people like crap". The topic went into some offshoot subjects, which I would admit, although a bit of a stretch were more or less relevant to keeping the conversation going.
What I'm trying to present is a discussion observing quite how open you are to topics and lifestyles that have not yet been widely accepted or discussed yet. And how you can objectively react to them without having heard much outside opinion on said subject. This of course relates back to my theory that many people (and again, I'm not saying everyone, nor am I specifically saying anyone on here) tend to accept or not accept any given topic, based less on what their own personal analysis of the subject is and more on whether or not it's socially acceptable at the time to embrace said topic.
Does that clear it up? Might you be able to answer the question now?
@MikeyG: Heh, I do admit it's off topic, but yeah your av always gave me pause. I mean, I understand where you're coming from with it. And I mean, I'm certainly not offended by it. But it does seem like something that might otherwise have caused controversy if you weren't the one wearing it. Would I be allowed to have an AV of a women's bikini clad wet chest where her breasts were soaped up and wiggling around? If so, then we're cool, I'm totally in support and I suppose the rules are a bit more lax than I thought on those things, which is great.
Aside from that, I still don't get where the hell you or dcartist as getting the idea I was somehow playing the victim card. Can someone actually tell me where they got that from as opposed to just continually making the observation?
Am I calling you bias, yes that I am doing. Not bias against me, or in support of any particular member here, not at all. I am however implying that you might (I could be wrong) be bias against the particular subject. I'm not saying that I WANT you to close the thread or to dole out warnings, quite the contrary, I'd feel pretty cheated if I got all that flack and was suddenly not allowed to respond. I'm just saying that it has seemed that in similar times, you've reacted differently, that's all.
And c'mon man, don't give me that "I'm busy cause of the holidays" crap. I mean, you've had enough time to respond three times here already. I've modded at other Vbulletin boards before, I know damn well it doesn't take any longer to make a post in white letters than it does in red.
And again, I'm not even saying that that's the option I wish you had chosen, because it's certainly not. It just seems like a weak excuse on your part.
What am I dodging? The exact question was related to art. Specifically:
Well, there's one thing I've thinking a lot these days: why do people like crap? I mean, "commercial stuff". Specially in music and films.
As far as commercial furry art goes, most of it is crap. Kemba, Kha Regent is not going to show up in MOMA, now or ever, and it does not deserve to.
If we are discussing Furry art that is non-commercial, well, see: fanfiction. Yes, most of it is crap. There very well could be some actual art hiding out there. If so, I haven't seen it, but what I have seen is no decider as to what exists, and I would be the first to say my search is not comprehensive.
I don't see what the point of this aside was, and I still continue to think that the major purpose of you bringing up this subject is to derail the conversation. As can be easily seen, it adds nearly nothing to the discussion, beyond a derail possibility. There is very little commercial furry art compared to other forms of commercial art, such as pop music, action films, etc. It's not very important. I give it the same consideration I give any other art, and I'd give an artist who drew Furry art the same consideration I'd give any other artist.
If this forum had Greasers, Phoenix, Commons and Semantics would be the leaders of the gang and every time they commented on something they would do a synchronized finger snap then smoke a cigarette.
JTO, it's the change in tone that made it obvious you were playing the victim card.
You may think that you may be fooling somebody with this tapdance to defend the over-reaching early statements that you made, but frankly everybody here knows what you're doing. Everybody here knows what I'm talking about. It's not rocket science to read through your posts. Watching you argue in this thread is like playing my 8 year old nephew in a game of chess.
It's very obvious that early on you went on a rant about Gaga, because you have really decided you dislike her. So sure of yourself of finding sympathizers with you, you decided not only to just exaggerate and make up crap about stuff knew nothing about (her background, her talent, her gender, whatever), you decided to take the further step of disparaging anybody who likes her or listens to her, claiming that people who like her do so because the media tells them to like her, and that you actually look DOWN on her fans.
Several posters here systematically tore your ill-considered positions to shreds, and when you decided to make some feeble defenses of your statements, they used you as a chew toy.
As for the "victim card", it's the complete change in tone that started a page or two back in your posts. We all saw it, and watching you reflexively going back into aggression mode was actually kinda funny. Now you're using the rather tired technique of trying to derail the thread (by talking about "furries" )
Why would anybody have a problem with "furries"?
If "furries mean what I think "furries" means (including the sexual thing), then I have no problem with furries. How is "furry" fetishism any "weirder" than high heels, leather, or latex? How is arousal from furries that different from Hentai... or N'avi from Avatar? Or trekkies? Only somebody really, really juvenile would think "furries" are relevant to this conversation. If your disdain for and mocking of Gaga comes from the same place in your soul, that mockery of "furries" comes from, that's just ugly, and confirms the immaturity.
Are you suggesting that people (1) mock furries because the media tells them to OR (2) become furries because the media tells them to?
Did you have some different agenda when you brought up furries? Did you figure that if I stood up for furries, you'd be in a better position to mock me? if they're consenting adults, leave them alone. I know couples that met on Everquest and got married, and wear medieval gear everywhere. Life's too short to hate.
Now as for whether furries like "crap" art or music, I don't really know what kind of art they like. Probably all different kinds just like non-furries. It's something we humans all have in common.
For the record, Jolly, I've not been offended by anything you've said yet. People make fun of people I like all the time; so much so that I just don't care about it anymore. That said, let me address one more thing before we should really put this to rest:
And with that, let me ask you guys this question again. Can you truly say that you will feel this strongly about Lady Gaga by summer of 2012?
Quite simply...yes. Why? For the same reason that there are still strong fans of Queen after so many decades; because they, while popular, still leave a strong impression, and acquire a strong, dedicated fan-base.
Well, I know a lot of people who would pick an entertainer's music over any classical anytime. And that's what I'm asking: why do people like music "without quality"?
You say there has to be a line drawn... but where, how, why?
The line is drawn between simply not liking the classics versus out right ignorance of their importance. Anyone who would say that an "entertainer's" music is better than an actual "musician's" music simply because they like it more is being ridiculously ignorant.
Wait, the only music we are allowed to like *now* is music we know for a fact we will still like in 2012? Did everyone else get crystal balls while I was off playing Super Smash Bros or something?
Perhaps answer this then. How is discussing my personal views on transgenderism (something I've had to make clear at least a dozen times) any less of an attempt to derail? By derail are you more specifically meaning "changing the subject from where you want it to be" as opposed to actual derailing from the subject at hand. It seems clear that Phoenix and Dcartist basically want the subject to remain "JollyTheOctopuss Is a bigoted scumbag playing the victim card". As alas, it does seem to be the one and only point either have you addressed.
And what exactly was my change in tone? Was it when I tried to step back and keep the conversation from just devolving into flames? Mind you, I'm not the one who insulted anyone. Keep in mind you 2 were the ones throwing around the word bigot and saying that I'm the kind of person that one would certainly be in the right to disagree with, saying I have the intelligence of an 8 year old, called me a liar, and that's just to name a few. I never said I looked down on anyone who liked Lady Gaga, that's one of MANY things you 2 just randomly made up and ran with, and although I did indeed say that media input MIGHT play a part in SOME people's decision making. I repeated time and time again that I didn't mean it as an absolute, something you've both managed to overlook EVERY SINGLE TIME.
You've called me a liar, yet haven't actually mentioned what I was lying about. You've twisted my words time and time again to mean the entire opposite of what my intention was.
example:
f your disdain for and mocking of Gaga comes from the same place in your soul, that mockery of "furries" comes from, that's just ugly, and confirms the immaturity.
You might notice I never actually mocked furries. Again, a blatant attempt to just cast me in a bad light with no actual basis.
You can see that right?
What's worse is that when I do try to actually step back a bit and clear the air and even go so far as to apologize for statements that were taken the wrong way or maybe a bit over the top. I'm suddenly called out for playing the victim card. You see that right?
You've decided that I'm an ignorant, bigoted, liar, simply because I don't like the same music as you. And at this point there's not a thing I can do to possibly say or do to change that. You see that right?
And you've completely overlooked any explanation I've tried to give the both of you, instead choosing to just hammer away with baseless insults and accusations. Yet, I'm the one being immature here?
I implore you to look back over my statements, and tell me where I've personally insulted either of you. And don't give me that "You said we only like our music cause the TV told us" thing, because I said from the start that (Again, please go ahead and look) that it was a general statement and that I didn't feel this was the case for everyone.
@Jacker: I appreciate you're input and thank you for not just going off into accusations. If you truly feel you'll still dig Lady Gaga a year or two for now, I'll take your word for it.
@silverycord: Are you very young? Just asking? I mean, you understand that wasn't my intention with that question, yes?
] It seems clear that Phoenix and Dcartist basically want the subject to remain "JollyTheOctopuss Is a bigoted scumbag playing the victim card". As alas, it does seem to be the one and only point either have you addressed.
What am I dodging? The exact question was related to art. Specifically:
As far as commercial furry art goes, most of it is crap. Kemba, Kha Regent is not going to show up in MOMA, now or ever, and it does not deserve to.
If we are discussing Furry art that is non-commercial, well, see: fanfiction. Yes, most of it is crap. There very well could be some actual art hiding out there. If so, I haven't seen it, but what I have seen is no decider as to what exists, and I would be the first to say my search is not comprehensive.
I don't see what the point of this aside was, and I still continue to think that the major purpose of you bringing up this subject is to derail the conversation. As can be easily seen, it adds nearly nothing to the discussion, beyond a derail possibility. There is very little commercial furry art compared to other forms of commercial art, such as pop music, action films, etc. It's not very important. I give it the same consideration I give any other art, and I'd give an artist who drew Furry art the same consideration I'd give any other artist.
Honestly, we've all basically made our judgments on your attitudes and beliefs expressed in this thread. The subject is pretty closed. You are the only person left who keeps bringing it up, again and again, because you don't like the conclusions we drew as a result of those posts. I don't really give a crap anymore, but this victim card nonsense is totally overhyped. Believe me, I feel no need to retread the grounds of your past posts, they were quite sufficient for me. The discussion of your negative views and how you used them in your attempted smears is already over and done with.
Now honestly, I'd rather this discussion get back on track. But keep lying about what I said to attack my character, and yes, I'll keep refuting the lies.
P.S. Jolly, the first, last, and only insult I needed from you was to be told I worshiped something. You have repeated it several times. I consider it nearly insulting beyond words, and I'm an atheist. Christians consider that to be breaking their most sacred commandment - you're literally accusing them of breaking the highest law that their God gave them. That's not to mention your slurs aimed at various communities, your general shots along the lines of "well if you don't agree with me you aren't thinking clearly" and "if you don't agree with me you're very stupid." If you think you haven't been deeply insulting, you are inconceivably wrong.
Honestly, lets just see what these non insulting and nonconfrontational statements that did nothing to insult us were:
All I'm saying is that I think people are all too willing to let all their info come from one tiny part of our environment, that being mainstream media. And that most of these people aren't really looking at the information they're being fed analytically as much as just immediately accepting it at face value.
Certainly we all (myself included) do this to some extent. I'm just saying that some do this more than others and that it's perhaps not the most healthy or progressive way to go about living.
You think we're so stupid as that we cannot figure out what you are writing? Oh give it a rest. That one can replace all of one's pronouns in a sentence with ambiguous ones that might even be plural is true. Some are so erudite and well-written that they can slide these insults cleverly by an imbecilic opposition as a nod to the general audience. Many others find themselves in the role of the opposition, trying to 'cleverly' slide it by when they are the ones that the audience is already snickering about.
Some of us hang lampshades on our writing to make a point.
If this forum had Greasers, Phoenix, Commons and Semantics would be the leaders of the gang and every time they commented on something they would do a synchronized finger snap then smoke a cigarette.
Honestly, we've all basically made our judgments on your attitudes and beliefs expressed in this thread. The subject is pretty closed. You are the only person left who keeps bringing it up, again and again, because you don't like the conclusions we drew as a result of those posts. I don't really give a crap anymore, but this victim card nonsense is totally overhyped. Believe me, I feel no need to retread the grounds of your past posts, they were quite sufficient for me. The discussion of your negative views and how you used them in your attempted smears is already over and done with.
Leave me the ☺☺☺☺ alone, and I'll extend you the same courtesy. Keep lying about what I said, and yes, I'll keep refuting the lies.
Wow man, I don't even know what to say. Somehow I'm harassing you now?!!? What did I lie about? Can you at least tell me that before you leave? Seriously.......
And again, how am I playing the victim card? I keep bringing up the same questions because you both keep making baseless accusations and refuse to give any sort of reason behind them. And now you're finally just running off?
Anyone who would say that an "entertainer's" music is better than an actual "musician's" music simply because they like it more is being ridiculously ignorant.
Ignorant of what? Why are they important? And why isn't that importance easy to grasp or appreciate (for all the people) in their very same work?
P.S. Jolly, the first, last, and only insult I needed from you was to be told I worshiped something. You have repeated it several times. I consider it nearly insulting beyond words, and I'm an atheist. Christians consider that to be breaking their most sacred commandment - you're literally accusing them of breaking the highest law that their God gave them. If you think you haven't been deeply insulting, you fail.
We got that part out of the way. Now how am I playing the victim card by trying to step back from sending the direction of the convo the wrong way or apologizing for statements that were taken too strongly?
You think we're so stupid as that we cannot figure out what you are writing? Oh give it a rest. That one can replace all of one's pronouns in a sentence with ambiguous ones that might even be plural is true. Some are so erudite and well-written that they can slide these insults cleverly by an imbecilic opposition as a nod to the general audience. Many others find themselves in the role of the opposition, trying to 'cleverly' slide it by when they are the ones that the audience is already snickering about.
Some of us hang lampshades on our writing to make a point.
Phew, I give up. You're fighting yourself at this point. All you've done is distort everything I've said. If you're just gonna change the meaning of the things I say, make up things that I never did say and then just argue those points, I don't really need to be here now do I? I mean, if that was truly what I intended to mean, why would I try to refute it so much?
I just hope you realize you are doing that and have been doing that THIS WHOLE TIME. You're literally making up points to argue against, points I NEVER brought up myself.
You ask me to reference statements that are quoted at the top of my post. You accuse me of distorting your words, they are right there for anyone to read and see any distortion I have made on my part. You wonder that I feel unjustly accused, and berate me for feeling as if you are making no effort to understand anyone.
I am making up nothing. I have not made up anything. I repeat that these attacks on my character are complete and utter bullcrap, and always have been. I quote your very words to show you the basis for the complaints, and you claim that I am making up statements and sticking words in your mouth and that the complaints have no basis.
If this forum had Greasers, Phoenix, Commons and Semantics would be the leaders of the gang and every time they commented on something they would do a synchronized finger snap then smoke a cigarette.
You ask me to reference statements that are quoted at the top of my post. You accuse me of distorting your words, they are right there for anyone to read and see any distortion I have made on my part. You wonder that I feel unjustly accused, and berate me for feeling as if you are making no effort to understand anyone.
I am making up nothing. I have not made up anything. I repeat that these attacks on my character are complete and utter bullcrap, and always have been. I quote your very words to show you the basis for the complaints, and you claim that I am making up statements and sticking words in your mouth and that the complaints have no basis.
But you do get that after quoting my post, you then insisted that I meant something entirely different then what the quoted post said, yes?
If this forum had Greasers, Phoenix, Commons and Semantics would be the leaders of the gang and every time they commented on something they would do a synchronized finger snap then smoke a cigarette.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That said, crap is easy to like if you don't care. If you don't care about music, you probably aren't going to like Caroliner or Coil. If you don't care about film, you probably aren't going to be watching Satyricon or El Topo. If you don't care about visual art, you'll probably have some goofy landscapes on a calendar instead of an Otto Dix or Paul Klee. If you don't care about literature, you probably aren't going to read Turgenev or William Burroughs. You can like mindless nonsense and still care (I still dig Aqua and Sin With Sebastian {I guess I was mistaken when I said I don't like that sort of thing?!} and lots of completely braindead metal.)
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
You can hate the "meaningful" content and still care about the medium.
God DAMN I love Caroliner.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
I totally agree, let's do that.
We're definitely not gonna get anywhere the way this is going right now. So I'll make the first move in trying to step back a bit. And maybe even hopefully get back to what we were originally talking about.
I'll try one last time to address the whole "you're a bigot" issue as clearly as I possibly can.
While I understand it can in interpreted that by taking a shot at Lady Gaga by calling her a man, that I'm trying to imply that there's something wrong with being transgendered. I assure you that wasn't my intention.
As I've said many times before here, I am in full support of people being allowed to express themselves and live however they see fit and I think it's great when people can be themselves in the face of diversity.
I'd certainly admit it was at worse a cheap pot shot. But if I'm a bigot for saying that, so is everyone who's ever taken part in a celebrity roast. Those things are choc full of racist, sexist and all sorts of other nasty jokes, but would would say the comedians on there are genuinely racist or are they just busting eachother's balls?
I don't really know what more I can say to clear that up. I would like a lil more info on what you meant by "playing the victim card" as I can't for the life of me even begin to understand how you came to that conclusion.
Regarding me being insulting. Unless I've missed something, I haven't directly attacked anyone other than Lady Gaga. I however have been reduced to nothing more than a bigot. And this is with people knowing nothing of my personal views outside of the fact that I'm not a fan of Lady Gaga.
Although I've said before that I don't think that "mass media influence" is the one and only reason people are fans of her music, I do feel it's a relevant issue. And that this issue plays a large part in many people's opinions.
Something I've tried to bring up multiple times here, but have had disregarded was my inquiries about the Furry subculture. Although I'm not part of this subculture myself, it does seem that it's a lot more acceptable to give flack to furries, despite them essentially being in a similar boat of "just trying to live life in the way that feels right for them". And I can't help but think that that's largely due to how there's really not been much fed to people to make them feel otherwise. I'm not accusing anyone here of feeling exactly this way, but I think it's something to consider. Or even take into consideration any other group of people with "extremely unconventional" sexual interests. Are you truly accepting of every person's interests? And I'm specifically talking interests that would involve consenting adults where no one is being harmed. Do you accept all these various tastes, or are their exceptions to what you think is okay regarding this? I personally do accept and tolerate ANYTHING that consenting adults wish to do in the privacy of their own home, providing it's not harming or involving anyone who doesn't want to be involved.
There's lots of things in this culture that people take offense too that seems contradictory when applied to something else. If a black comedian were to have a long bit about how he things white people are stuck-up or can't dance or how they all look the same to him, people would laugh right along with him. If a white comedian were to use this EXACT same material, yet simply replace the white with black. He'd be ruined. He'd be forced to appear on every talk show for the next few months apologizing over and over again just so he could fade into obscurity, hopefully in peace.
I concede that this is a bit off subject, but it's an example of what I'm speaking of when I say people's opinions (not everyone here mind you) can indeed be a bit too largely shaped by what they're told they can and cannot feel.
As for Lady Gaga herself, you're all more than welcome to feel how you feel about her. If you look back, I'm not and never was actually attacking anyone for liking her (seriously, go look back at all the times I said people are free to like what they like, I'll wait......). I feel differently and I have every right to feel that way for whatever reason I choose to. It doesn't make me right or you wrong, it just means I have different taste. And that is indeed essentially what I've been saying from the start. If I've personally offended anyone, I can even be the big man and apologize for that. I stand behind what I said, but if you were offended, that wasn't my intention.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
Check the title. Link furries to it. You can't. Derail done, go away plox.
But to answer why people look down on people that like different music then there selves, it has more to do with human psychology and the way we form and recognize peer groups than the music itself.
Everyone is a food lover just some love food more then others and those that don't like good are often times dead <,<
I agree with the sentiment that art that does not exist to transcend or communicate some inner truth or whatever you want to call it is just diversion or decoration, though. Obviously what accomplishes that goal is different for everybody. I listen to a pretty huge range of music (at work the other day, when I had control of the ipod dock, we listened to Tuvan throat singing, Dead Prez, a gamelan orchestra, Alice Coltrane, GG Allin, Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel {he does the music for The Venture Bros for those that don't know!}, Husker Du, Psychic TV, and The Butthole Surfers... I'm weird), and I often use different types of music as very easy ways to invoke various emotions or mental states.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
You say there has to be a line drawn... but where, how, why?
[Clan Flamingo]
The clan for custom card creators!
Why don't we each talk about things we personally like that most other people seem to think is crap, and talk about exactly why we like it? We can get more earnest viewpoints about why we like the stuff that has the 'crap' label.
I have much better examples, but I'm in a hurry, so I'll say this: I love Taco bell. I know it's crap mexican food (it's not even mexican food). It's highly unoriginal and unauthentic. It's not good for me at all as far as I know.
I like the taste of this crappy food, and sometimes I just get a craving for it. Their cheese-whizzy stuff they put on their deep fried Chalupas, and even their lame little hard and soft tacos. The salsa from those little condiment packets, I can't smother enough of the stuff.
I don't think they're successful because of their advertising. Though their commercials give them exposure (esp. the cute dog), I dont' think the commercials make me think that Taco bell is cool to eat or anything. I don't think I go there because the commercial tells me to run for the border. That Chalupa dog was cute though, so maybe I was brainwashed.
I think go there because I know exactly what I'm going to get and there is consistency to their food (key for any fast food franchise which is why McDonald's is so popular), there is a nice sodium and fat content and flavor profile to their food, and the chances that their food will make me sick is much lower than any other franchise place that serves tacos with lettuce and tomato bits on the east coast.
Maybe that's not a good example of true 'crap', but I will think harder while I go work.
And? My avatar's a bit from a music video satirizing the typical "dancing ho" routine in rap/hiphop videos by replacing the girls with guys. The objectification role-reversal is a huge part of the point. The other being sexy dancing guys. I'm not sure how that relates to or contradicts my earlier point since Salvation has never to my knowledge taken a hard stance against appreciating hot people so long as the imagery remains work safe and the associated commentary doesn't become lewd or crass.
It's not embarrassing, immature or indecent to have a hot guy (who's not nude) dancing in an avatar.
Yup, it's all because I'm biased and clearly against you and not because I'm busy working doubles and getting holiday stuff done. Fantastic.
And for the record, debating the artistic merits of a particular musical artist in a thread debating the relative objectivity of musical quality isn't all that off-topic. The whole Gaga=man crap was, but at no point did it really threaten to dominate the thread and derail it anyway so as long as the bulk of the thread stayed the course and no one got too heated, I probably wouldn't have had to course correct the thread.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
There's nothing "simple" about it, and as you rightly point out, if you do it haphazardly, it makes the art far worse. But a piece of art that is perfectly complex fully engages the senses, without overwhelming or distracting them, and leads them all towards appreciation of the single unified whole. Remove some complexity from such a piece, and you do diminish it. The genius of a great composer like Bach lies not in his complexity - any boob can make complex music - but rather in his selecting the right complexity.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
What I'm trying to present is a discussion observing quite how open you are to topics and lifestyles that have not yet been widely accepted or discussed yet. And how you can objectively react to them without having heard much outside opinion on said subject. This of course relates back to my theory that many people (and again, I'm not saying everyone, nor am I specifically saying anyone on here) tend to accept or not accept any given topic, based less on what their own personal analysis of the subject is and more on whether or not it's socially acceptable at the time to embrace said topic.
Does that clear it up? Might you be able to answer the question now?
@MikeyG: Heh, I do admit it's off topic, but yeah your av always gave me pause. I mean, I understand where you're coming from with it. And I mean, I'm certainly not offended by it. But it does seem like something that might otherwise have caused controversy if you weren't the one wearing it. Would I be allowed to have an AV of a women's bikini clad wet chest where her breasts were soaped up and wiggling around? If so, then we're cool, I'm totally in support and I suppose the rules are a bit more lax than I thought on those things, which is great.
Aside from that, I still don't get where the hell you or dcartist as getting the idea I was somehow playing the victim card. Can someone actually tell me where they got that from as opposed to just continually making the observation?
Am I calling you bias, yes that I am doing. Not bias against me, or in support of any particular member here, not at all. I am however implying that you might (I could be wrong) be bias against the particular subject. I'm not saying that I WANT you to close the thread or to dole out warnings, quite the contrary, I'd feel pretty cheated if I got all that flack and was suddenly not allowed to respond. I'm just saying that it has seemed that in similar times, you've reacted differently, that's all.
And c'mon man, don't give me that "I'm busy cause of the holidays" crap. I mean, you've had enough time to respond three times here already. I've modded at other Vbulletin boards before, I know damn well it doesn't take any longer to make a post in white letters than it does in red.
And again, I'm not even saying that that's the option I wish you had chosen, because it's certainly not. It just seems like a weak excuse on your part.
As far as commercial furry art goes, most of it is crap. Kemba, Kha Regent is not going to show up in MOMA, now or ever, and it does not deserve to.
If we are discussing Furry art that is non-commercial, well, see: fanfiction. Yes, most of it is crap. There very well could be some actual art hiding out there. If so, I haven't seen it, but what I have seen is no decider as to what exists, and I would be the first to say my search is not comprehensive.
I don't see what the point of this aside was, and I still continue to think that the major purpose of you bringing up this subject is to derail the conversation. As can be easily seen, it adds nearly nothing to the discussion, beyond a derail possibility. There is very little commercial furry art compared to other forms of commercial art, such as pop music, action films, etc. It's not very important. I give it the same consideration I give any other art, and I'd give an artist who drew Furry art the same consideration I'd give any other artist.
You may think that you may be fooling somebody with this tapdance to defend the over-reaching early statements that you made, but frankly everybody here knows what you're doing. Everybody here knows what I'm talking about. It's not rocket science to read through your posts. Watching you argue in this thread is like playing my 8 year old nephew in a game of chess.
It's very obvious that early on you went on a rant about Gaga, because you have really decided you dislike her. So sure of yourself of finding sympathizers with you, you decided not only to just exaggerate and make up crap about stuff knew nothing about (her background, her talent, her gender, whatever), you decided to take the further step of disparaging anybody who likes her or listens to her, claiming that people who like her do so because the media tells them to like her, and that you actually look DOWN on her fans.
Several posters here systematically tore your ill-considered positions to shreds, and when you decided to make some feeble defenses of your statements, they used you as a chew toy.
As for the "victim card", it's the complete change in tone that started a page or two back in your posts. We all saw it, and watching you reflexively going back into aggression mode was actually kinda funny. Now you're using the rather tired technique of trying to derail the thread (by talking about "furries" )
Why would anybody have a problem with "furries"?
If "furries mean what I think "furries" means (including the sexual thing), then I have no problem with furries. How is "furry" fetishism any "weirder" than high heels, leather, or latex? How is arousal from furries that different from Hentai... or N'avi from Avatar? Or trekkies? Only somebody really, really juvenile would think "furries" are relevant to this conversation. If your disdain for and mocking of Gaga comes from the same place in your soul, that mockery of "furries" comes from, that's just ugly, and confirms the immaturity.
Are you suggesting that people (1) mock furries because the media tells them to OR (2) become furries because the media tells them to?
Did you have some different agenda when you brought up furries? Did you figure that if I stood up for furries, you'd be in a better position to mock me? if they're consenting adults, leave them alone. I know couples that met on Everquest and got married, and wear medieval gear everywhere. Life's too short to hate.
Now as for whether furries like "crap" art or music, I don't really know what kind of art they like. Probably all different kinds just like non-furries. It's something we humans all have in common.
Quite simply...yes. Why? For the same reason that there are still strong fans of Queen after so many decades; because they, while popular, still leave a strong impression, and acquire a strong, dedicated fan-base.
The line is drawn between simply not liking the classics versus out right ignorance of their importance. Anyone who would say that an "entertainer's" music is better than an actual "musician's" music simply because they like it more is being ridiculously ignorant.
And what exactly was my change in tone? Was it when I tried to step back and keep the conversation from just devolving into flames? Mind you, I'm not the one who insulted anyone. Keep in mind you 2 were the ones throwing around the word bigot and saying that I'm the kind of person that one would certainly be in the right to disagree with, saying I have the intelligence of an 8 year old, called me a liar, and that's just to name a few. I never said I looked down on anyone who liked Lady Gaga, that's one of MANY things you 2 just randomly made up and ran with, and although I did indeed say that media input MIGHT play a part in SOME people's decision making. I repeated time and time again that I didn't mean it as an absolute, something you've both managed to overlook EVERY SINGLE TIME.
You've called me a liar, yet haven't actually mentioned what I was lying about. You've twisted my words time and time again to mean the entire opposite of what my intention was.
example:
You might notice I never actually mocked furries. Again, a blatant attempt to just cast me in a bad light with no actual basis.
You can see that right?
What's worse is that when I do try to actually step back a bit and clear the air and even go so far as to apologize for statements that were taken the wrong way or maybe a bit over the top. I'm suddenly called out for playing the victim card. You see that right?
You've decided that I'm an ignorant, bigoted, liar, simply because I don't like the same music as you. And at this point there's not a thing I can do to possibly say or do to change that. You see that right?
And you've completely overlooked any explanation I've tried to give the both of you, instead choosing to just hammer away with baseless insults and accusations. Yet, I'm the one being immature here?
I implore you to look back over my statements, and tell me where I've personally insulted either of you. And don't give me that "You said we only like our music cause the TV told us" thing, because I said from the start that (Again, please go ahead and look) that it was a general statement and that I didn't feel this was the case for everyone.
@Jacker: I appreciate you're input and thank you for not just going off into accusations. If you truly feel you'll still dig Lady Gaga a year or two for now, I'll take your word for it.
@silverycord: Are you very young? Just asking? I mean, you understand that wasn't my intention with that question, yes?
My last post...
Honestly, we've all basically made our judgments on your attitudes and beliefs expressed in this thread. The subject is pretty closed. You are the only person left who keeps bringing it up, again and again, because you don't like the conclusions we drew as a result of those posts. I don't really give a crap anymore, but this victim card nonsense is totally overhyped. Believe me, I feel no need to retread the grounds of your past posts, they were quite sufficient for me. The discussion of your negative views and how you used them in your attempted smears is already over and done with.
Now honestly, I'd rather this discussion get back on track. But keep lying about what I said to attack my character, and yes, I'll keep refuting the lies.
P.S. Jolly, the first, last, and only insult I needed from you was to be told I worshiped something. You have repeated it several times. I consider it nearly insulting beyond words, and I'm an atheist. Christians consider that to be breaking their most sacred commandment - you're literally accusing them of breaking the highest law that their God gave them. That's not to mention your slurs aimed at various communities, your general shots along the lines of "well if you don't agree with me you aren't thinking clearly" and "if you don't agree with me you're very stupid." If you think you haven't been deeply insulting, you are inconceivably wrong.
Honestly, lets just see what these non insulting and nonconfrontational statements that did nothing to insult us were:
You think we're so stupid as that we cannot figure out what you are writing? Oh give it a rest. That one can replace all of one's pronouns in a sentence with ambiguous ones that might even be plural is true. Some are so erudite and well-written that they can slide these insults cleverly by an imbecilic opposition as a nod to the general audience. Many others find themselves in the role of the opposition, trying to 'cleverly' slide it by when they are the ones that the audience is already snickering about.
Some of us hang lampshades on our writing to make a point.
Wow man, I don't even know what to say. Somehow I'm harassing you now?!!? What did I lie about? Can you at least tell me that before you leave? Seriously.......
And again, how am I playing the victim card? I keep bringing up the same questions because you both keep making baseless accusations and refuse to give any sort of reason behind them. And now you're finally just running off?
[Clan Flamingo]
The clan for custom card creators!
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hyperbole
We got that part out of the way. Now how am I playing the victim card by trying to step back from sending the direction of the convo the wrong way or apologizing for statements that were taken too strongly?
Phew, I give up. You're fighting yourself at this point. All you've done is distort everything I've said. If you're just gonna change the meaning of the things I say, make up things that I never did say and then just argue those points, I don't really need to be here now do I? I mean, if that was truly what I intended to mean, why would I try to refute it so much?
I just hope you realize you are doing that and have been doing that THIS WHOLE TIME. You're literally making up points to argue against, points I NEVER brought up myself.
Happy holidays to ya. I'm done.
I am making up nothing. I have not made up anything. I repeat that these attacks on my character are complete and utter bullcrap, and always have been. I quote your very words to show you the basis for the complaints, and you claim that I am making up statements and sticking words in your mouth and that the complaints have no basis.
But you do get that after quoting my post, you then insisted that I meant something entirely different then what the quoted post said, yes?
Anyone is free to read the post and draw their own conclusions, it is not as if the words are hidden pages and pages back, yes?
If they draw conclusions that parallel mine, I cannot see how I have misrepresented you.