- Oct 17, 2011
- 44,010
- 47,028
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It did stop me though.Rush tickets are $300 for the lower level, but that didn't stop me...
Time to dust off the ol’ Satanic Panic.I just don't know where this wild idea came from that his live performances may run the risk of including anything of a sexual nature or anything demonic.
I mean sure, there's those music videos of him dressed in drag and chained to demons while wearing a BDSM collar... but not sure why people think being chained demons while wearing sex fetish gear would be demonic or sexual.
This reminds me of that one time when some lunatic tried to suggest that the band Sublime may have some marijuana themes in their music.
I don't know if it's quite that drastic...Time to dust off the ol’ Satanic Panic.
I dispute that a lot of this shocking! contemporary stuff is meant to shock. I think most of it is just in group identification, as well as what actually interests the artist.I don't know if it's quite that drastic...
But I've noticed over the past 5 years or so, there's a "progressive playbook" on these sorts of things...
Step 1: Do something that clearly intended for shock value
Step 2: Wait until a subset of people are predictably shocked by it
Step 3: Portray it as "ridiculous" that people are shocked by it, and gaslight and pretend that what they're doing is unremarkable
This has a lot of similarities to the Sam Smith stuff that happened at the Grammy awards. Almost the exact same pattern, actually.
Being a Gen X'er, I remember when artists going for shock value used to own it and didn't mince words about why they were doing it. I can respect that angle.
But today, it's an approach where they're clearly going for that shock value, but then gaslight and pretend the thing they're doing shouldn't even be considered shocking in the first place "Gee, why are you so shocked by this?" (as if there's something wrong with the other person)
When the Red Hot Chili Peppers used to get on stage and perform in nothing but tube socks, it was pretty evident why they were doing it, they (and their fans) thought it was funny, and they got a little jolt from intentionally offending the "stuffy old people".
Nobody tried to deny or deflect by acting all aloof like "Hmmm...why would people be shocked by that? Sounds like they're just overly sensitive"
Which group would Bad Bunny be trying to identify with? From all accounts I've read, he's straight (and to my knowledge, doesn't practice "the dark arts" so to speak)I dispute that a lot of this shocking! contemporary stuff is meant to shock. I think most of it is just in group identification, as well as what actually interests the artist.
Trying to be shocking is worn out and passe.
In this case youre just guessing, unless you have some actual insight into his motives. But I think you would have said so.Which group would Bad Bunny be trying to identify with? From all accounts I've read, he's straight (and to my knowledge, doesn't practice "the dark arts" so to speak)
So dressing up as a woman with a bondage fetish collar, chained to demons for a music video, would be things that just generally interest him?
If it is his sincere general interest, then the labelling of "sexual and demonic" that pundits have tossed out should be viewed as a fair labelling of the situation.
If it's not his sincere interest, then the shock value label I tossed out there would be apropos.
In this case youre just guessing, unless you have some actual insight into his motives. But I think you would have said so.