― anthony easton (anthony), Saturday, 31 May 2003 06:27 (twenty-two years ago)
― Michael Stuchbery (Mikey Bidness), Saturday, 31 May 2003 06:31 (twenty-two years ago)
― Justyn Dillingham (Justyn Dillingham), Saturday, 31 May 2003 11:17 (twenty-two years ago)
― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Saturday, 31 May 2003 11:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― Andrew (enneff), Saturday, 31 May 2003 11:42 (twenty-two years ago)
― Mary (Mary), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:22 (twenty-two years ago)
― James Blount (James Blount), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:25 (twenty-two years ago)
― Jordan (Jordan), Saturday, 31 May 2003 19:11 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Saturday, 31 May 2003 22:43 (twenty-two years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 31 May 2003 23:09 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Sunday, 1 June 2003 03:47 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 05:09 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 05:30 (twenty-two years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:24 (twenty-two years ago)
i wanna qualify this: while female femininity is something of a traditional gender role, femininity can be and often is a challenge/threat to patriarchy. but some kinds of female femininity are much more acceptable to the male hegemony than female masculinity is. as we all know, femininity is a diverse and wonderful thing.
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:30 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:31 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:35 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:43 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Sunday, 1 June 2003 06:55 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 07:07 (twenty-two years ago)
― Millar (Millar), Sunday, 1 June 2003 07:08 (twenty-two years ago)
actually, the idea is so hackneyed that even "friends" has had an episode using it. i hazard a guess that many queer women came to see "authentic vs inauthentic sexuality" as an example of unhelpful dichotomous thinking way back when madonna was playing with queer sex. ditto queer men and david bowie. sooo, i still don't really get why tatu are shocking or subversive.
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 07:55 (twenty-two years ago)
― di smith (lucylurex), Sunday, 1 June 2003 08:12 (twenty-two years ago)
― di schmidt (enneff), Sunday, 1 June 2003 11:34 (twenty-two years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 1 June 2003 12:30 (twenty-two years ago)
i understand what anthony means about the attractiveness of tatu's are-we-aren't-we ambiguity, but to be honest i find kathleen hanna (haha here we go again!) far more ambiguous and fascinating. the most interesting thing about tatu isn't their maybe-lesbianism, but the tremendously uncynical WE DON'T CARE attitude, which works as a kind of dare: "you can't possibly understand the complex nature of our sexuality - so don't even try, fools!"
this does not change the fact that "all the things she said" is one of the finest singles of the year.
― Justyn Dillingham (Justyn Dillingham), Sunday, 1 June 2003 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Sunday, 1 June 2003 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Sunday, 1 June 2003 14:17 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Sunday, 1 June 2003 14:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― Mary (Mary), Sunday, 1 June 2003 18:01 (twenty-two years ago)
Di OTM. Femme lesbians can translate into lesbians-for-the-masculine-gaze far easier than butch ones can. The absence of masculinity means a straight male viewer can view them in the same light as your straight girl mates snogging while drunk. Enjoying the sight of a masculine woman in an objectified sexual situation, on the other hand, might be pretty hard to stomach. Isn't part of the lure of 'lesbian porn' - the type made for men, not for women - meant to be the absence of dicks? That it's pure objectification, and having a man in there would be disturbing because the (straight male) viewer then has to consider him in a sexual light? A butch girl could just be too masculine, too close. She would definitely make it too gay.
"They're not gonna get us" is too high-pitched for me. Although apparently it has this fantastic original video featuring one of them getting jealous of the other's boyfriend and blowing up their school.
― cis (cis), Sunday, 1 June 2003 22:17 (twenty-two years ago)
― Leee (Leee), Sunday, 1 June 2003 22:34 (twenty-two years ago)
― Rino Williams, Tuesday, 30 December 2003 22:58 (twenty-two years ago)
Thanks for the tip. I was about to call you at home to tell you about the video.
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 30 December 2003 23:55 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pinche Pendejo (Pinche Pendejo), Wednesday, 31 December 2003 03:59 (twenty-two years ago)
― Devin Gregory Folkins, Friday, 23 April 2004 16:09 (twenty-one years ago)
― Devin Folkins, Friday, 23 April 2004 16:12 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 23 April 2004 16:20 (twenty-one years ago)
― Acid! Polizei! (ex machina), Friday, 23 April 2004 16:29 (twenty-one years ago)
― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Friday, 23 April 2004 16:35 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 23 April 2004 16:59 (twenty-one years ago)
thanks ten ten
― Tenshinokiba, Thursday, 6 May 2004 17:02 (twenty-one years ago)
who was PinkMoosePearl?
― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 5 December 2007 19:49 (eighteen years ago)
http://pinkmoose.blogspot.com/
― Dom Passantino, Wednesday, 5 December 2007 19:59 (eighteen years ago)
aha no wonder they were so annoying on aim to me
― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 5 December 2007 20:04 (eighteen years ago)
moose farm gives healing moose milk
― bell_labs, Wednesday, 5 December 2007 20:13 (eighteen years ago)