Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[nhp651]

A serious one from me for a change.

I do hope that this doesn't offend anyone, and I am not going out to do so but I would like to know the answer.

I STATE NOW that I am NOT homophobic in any way shape or form, and have had some good mates over the years in teaching, who have been gay, but there is a new trend and I would like to know if someone has an answer.

Why is music stigmatised as being ( so to speak) for the gay community.

I was in Blackpool yesterday with my wife and kids and there was a Gay Pride cocert just starting in the middle of the main street, with an area cordoned off for safety and for the large stage and misic area.

The concert began with, Queen, Erasure, Village People, Shirley Bassey, Abba and others.

Now these are groups and artists that I as a kid grew up with, enjoyed and still enjoy. great music that you can sing along too and which is gay( in the old sense) and happy music to sing along to.

But why has it now got this "stigma" or perhaps more catagorised as that music openly "enjoyed" by the gay community. It is as though they wish to monopolise the music that was ment for all.

I forget which old geezer said "If music is the food of love, then play on", but I would hope that we can ALL enjoy such music, and not feel uneasy just because a minority of ( for want of a better word) homophobes feel thay have a target in those who do like such music.

Could someone please explain to me WHY this type of music HAS been ( for want of another word) "hyjacked" by the gay community for their own signature music.

Thankyou, and I apologise if I have offended anyone, as I didn't mean to.

[Ghost in the shell]

hey i'd rather listen to the village people, queen, shirley bassey and abba ovr some of todays plastic pop

[Bee]

It is only a stigma if you designate it so. Otherwise it is just a genre, and there are many of those with varied following. I like most, don't hate any, though there are some I choose not to listen to if I can find something else.

[Roger in France]

Neil is asking a serious question and to dismiss it lightly or treat it superficially is to treat it less than seriously.

Music is all too often used to categorize those who perform it and those who listen to it. Some examples....

Pop music
Classical music
Church music
Folk music
Country music
One of the few anyone could take exception to is "World Music" (I have never been sure what is being described by such an all inclusive term!)

Pop is usually used in a derisive manner meaning shallow, transient, for the youngsters.

Classical often is used to mean highbrow, serious, difficult. To be preferred by an older audience often effete.

Church usually demands reverence and a sense of awe to be listened to with respect. Sometimes thought to be restricted to believers.

Folk often means simple, old, traditional. Listened to by hippies and scruffy layabouts. Often associated with a highly liberal alcohol and drug fuelled audience.

Country is often applied to some forms of folk but also is used to imply American decadence and alcohol and drug culture.

If you think about such descriptions they are all pretty ridiculous!

I am very keen on Mozart and many other composers. But I also like Queen. I enjoy the Beetles. I frequently play Bob Marley. Frank Sinatra impresses me with his relaxed mastery of what he sings. Edith Piaf is a favourite. I adore Ella Fitzgerald. Admire Bryn Tervill....shall I go on? To which category do I belong (please be polite!)?

I read the other day that the Gay Community especially likes the Eurovision Song Contest which was news to me.

Neil, it is all tosh! Music is for everyone, nobody owns it (except copyright holders). We should ignore any attempt to ear mark it or claim it. Listen to what you like and hope what others enjoy pleases them as much as your choice satisfies you.

Roger in France

[sheerline]

I take the attitude that if I like it, I will listen, if I don't, off it goes! I find my own personal taste in music is right across the board, it can be anything from classical all the way through to what is sometimes called 'black music', I even enjoy German march band music and am derided by my friends for it. It all depends on mood and how it grabs you at that moment and I have never been 'sold' or fixated by anything in particular. I do have my dislikes of course, I find 'church' music too laborious and boring whilst 'rap' will never be heard emanating from any loudspeaker in my house, it really grates on my ears.
As someone once said, if it feels good, do it. The other phrase which springs to mind, "if it offends thine eye, pluck it out" or in this case,  thine earole!
Music is for all, not for any ruddy minority group!
Enjoy.

[Ghost in the shell]

sheerline, I agree!

however what about gospel?

[FullLeatherJacket]

"The Beetles??" Friends of Adam and the Ants, McFly, The Spiders from Mars and Sting perhaps?

I'm sure you can admit to liking Queen and Abba without being labelled as gay. I would, however, draw the line at the Beverley Sisters.................

FLJ

[Colin Bishop]

Well, I've just got back from seeing the Strawbs at Worthing. They used to be categorised as Folk Rock but I don't think they fall into any mainstream category really. Great gig though!

Colin

[Peter Fitness]

Very well put, Roger.

Like you, I enjoy a wide variety of music genres, from the so called "popular" classics, through to some rock, folk and even country. I also loooove brass band music in fact, a highlight of my 1997 trip to England was seeing all the Guards bands at the Trooping the Colour ceremony. I also admit to being a big fan of ABBA  .

I don't believe that any one group of people "owns" a particular type of music, as you rightly pointed out, although one may be associated with them.

BTW, I assume you are referring to Bryn Terfel, a wonderful voice 

Peter.

[OMK]

Is this about gays nicking the best music, or just a dig at gays in general?
Dodgy subject, because a coulple of my pals are gay. Even a close family member has gone to the other side. So at the risk of sounding hypocritical/anti-gay/whatever, it doesn't alter the fact that gays have been running the asylum for years.

Genetically, I guess you can't help what you are. But to strut around bragging about it, and simply changing the marriage laws just to suit their own ends, will never alter the fact that men just cannot get pregnant, will never be a 'biological' parent to any child, and will always be castigated.

Thing is, they are EVERYwhere these days. Graham Norton, Jonathon Ross, and any half-baked so-called celebrity.... they have all jumped on the bandwagon, 'endorsing homosexuality'.

'Many in the media seem to me are guilty'  of forcing music into a stigmatic situation.

'Hang 'em al!l' Of course, that will never happen, because some blithering idiot said that we can't go around burning people anymore.
But at least take solice in the fact that they have the good sense to steer well clear of the rock-n-roll sort of scene.

Moderated,  amendments in 'apostrophes'

[Martin (Admin)]

Topic locked.... lets talk about something else now.