Lady Gaga

    • I'm actually curious. Why does the gay community worship Lady Gaga so? I mean, yes, she can sing quite well, but...why does the community idolize her as if she's some goddess/deity? She's just a performer -- a over-the-top one at that -- that makes interesting music and performances; not to mention she's pretty similar to Madonna.
      You can't say your gay and hate Lady Gaga, because then you're an outcast. And I'm curious as to why. To be honest, I find this more entertaining.

    • Re: Lady Gaga

      loren95 wrote:

      b cuz she stands up for what she believes is right and fight for her fans(wich happen to be part of the gay comunity) and the .gay comunity really helped her in the verry begining adn so in return she does her verry best to help us back. besides y wud she hate us ..shes bi to


      But there have been plenty of artists that have done that, and they don't get worshiped nearly as much as Lady Gaga does.

      ---------- Post added at 12:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 PM ----------

      Sarah wrote:

      Because she has no talent, the only way people would buy her music is if she stood up for a large group of people. So they'll buy her music.


      Too true.
      I noticed she didn't come out with "Born this way" until after several other artists were doing inspirational songs about being yourself. It was more like she jumped on the bandwagon rather than decided to suddenly stand up for what she believes in. She could have done that from the start.
    • Re: Lady Gaga

      Sarah wrote:

      Know what I hate so much? People think she's original, but she's not. Her costume people are.


      This. I can't remember where I read it, but I think it was in one of her interviews or something that she mentioned she wore clothes artists would make for her for some reason or another. Promotion of the artist, I think. But instead she gets all the credit. Her songs aren't all that great, either. Very very very few have any real meaning behind it that goes deeper than just sex and "love."
      She's just another pop star. A more eccentric one, granted, but still just another pop star.
    • Re: Lady Gaga

      loren95 wrote:

      b cuz she stands up for what she believes is right and fight for her fans(wich happen to be part of the gay comunity) and the .gay comunity really helped her in the verry begining adn so in return she does her verry best to help us back. besides y wud she hate us ..shes bi to


      I'm not saying she hates the gay community. However, there is a difference between exploiting it to get attention and another to stand up for rights. Maybe it is the latter -- maybe she did actually feel obliged to fight for rights. Personally, I think she just did it to get the publicity. Lady Gaga is the definition of an attention whore.

      MasterMayhem wrote:

      But there have been plenty of artists that have done that, and they don't get worshiped nearly as much as Lady Gaga does.


      This. If anything, people like Sir Ian McKellen and Dan Savage deserve some thanks for the fight for gay rights. Lady Gaga just seems to love scooping as much love from her brainless devotees as possible.

      MasterMayhem wrote:

      This. I can't remember where I read it, but I think it was in one of her interviews or something that she mentioned she wore clothes artists would make for her for some reason or another. Promotion of the artist, I think. But instead she gets all the credit.


      Her outfits are stupid. Again, goes to my theory that she's just an attention whore. I mean, it's one thing to have some ridiculous stuff, but the meat dress was enough. Animals got slaughtered just so she can be retarded. Sorry, but I have little sympathy for idiocy like that.

      MasterMayhem wrote:

      Her songs aren't all that great, either. Very very very few have any real meaning behind it that goes deeper than just sex and "love."
      She's just another pop star. A more eccentric one, granted, but still just another pop star.


      Her songs are generic crap. Yes, they are good in the sense that they're catchy and they stay in your head for a long time. But pop music has taken a huge decline in recent years. Hell, we have Rebecca Black now. Most pop songs I hear today have terrible lyrics with little to absolutely no meaning or symbolism.
      This is why I prefer rock and heavy metal. The music at least has some meaning behind them, especially with bands like Muse and Disturbed.

      And Sarah, don't start with Owl City. Adam's lyrics suck, I know. His songs just have a calming and fun melody to it.
    • Re: Lady Gaga

      Okay, lemme' get down on this shit. First off, what makes a gay icon? Cher, Madonna, Liza Minelli, all of them are glamorous but not sexualised. They are pretty, attractive, and damn sexy, but they're not piece's of meat like beyonce. There's a big difference, gay men can idolise them because they gain so much male attention, a gay man looks at her and thing "God, she's so pretty, so many guy's like her. I wish I was like that."

      Men can't be gay icons due to that male society mainly worships women. Ifv they are too bootylicous and non-tastefull it repels gay men, because they are naked women, which are gross. You also have to be fabulous, you have to have a telling and sympathetic story, Dolly's 9 to 5, Cher's gypsies tramp's and thieve's, all gay men feel a little heart ache over how they are gay, and they empathise with these women.

      On a note, Dan Savage is a bi-phobic hypocrite and general fucking cunt.

      Now, let's look at GaGa. She fills all the criteria, plus unlike Cher and Dolly she actually has done things for the gay community, which ascends her to the level of Cyndi Lauper level. She takes on the artistic motif throughout her video's and lyrics of being a "Mother Monster", the Mother idea comes from that she protects and defends the gay community, beaten down and alienated gay teens have a "mother" to sympathise with. A shoulder to cry on. She calls herself a "Monster", also empathising with the feeling of self hate, and yet she is proud of herself. An inspiration to gays.

      I could also talk about how her music video's, theme's, and lyrics all have an artistic message, and I could say how she has introduced surreal fashion and has turned into a collage of all that is modern society. How she critiques our worship of celebrities, and how this un-healthy obsession is destroying the nation. How she expresses and reveals the true nature of teenage agnst in the Born This Way album. But you do0n't want to listen to that, because she's just an attention whore, and another bubblegum pop in the millions.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    • Re: Lady Gaga

      cazoofoo wrote:

      First off, what makes a gay icon?


      A gay icon for me is someone who unselfishly does work to better the lives of their community without expectation of reward or fame. An example of a gay icon would be Harvey Milk, not...Cher.
      Sorry, even if Lady Gaga did fight for gay rights out of the kindness of her heart, there would still be a promotion agenda behind it all. The whole gay rights thing has strengthened her career.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      Men can't be gay icons due to that male society mainly worships women. Ifv they are too bootylicous and non-tastefull it repels gay men, because they are naked women, which are gross. You also have to be fabulous, you have to have a telling and sympathetic story, Dolly's 9 to 5, Cher's gypsies tramp's and thieve's, all gay men feel a little heart ache over how they are gay, and they empathise with these women.


      This paragraph makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You can be a man and be a gay icon. You don't have to be "fabulous." Again, points back to my argument that a gay icon is someone who does something to better the community without an agenda. Just because Lady Gaga and the rest of the so-called gay icons that you pointed out like to dress up in outrageous and often hideous outfits and sing overhyped and overplayed music, does not automatically make them a credible icon within the gay community. They'll just be tossed aside the moment someone new comes into the picture.
      Also, a sympathetic story is not a necessity. If celebrities play on their past misfortunes, it's merely a publicity stunt and nothing more. It's one thing to let your fans know you had it rough earlier in life, it's another to use it as a way to gain fame.

      cazoofoo wrote:


      On a note, Dan Savage is a bi-phobic hypocrite and general fucking cunt.


      How so? Yes, his ideas are controversial and opinionated, but at least he has strived to make the community better without personal gain from it.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      Now, let's look at GaGa. She fills all the criteria, plus unlike Cher and Dolly she actually has done things for the gay community, which ascends her to the level of Cyndi Lauper level.


      And her efforts are noted. However, I still believe her efforts have an agenda behind it, and I can think of a few celebrities who deserve much more attention that what she's getting. Even Susan Sarandon deserves a little love and appreciation, which I feel she's not getting.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      I could also talk about how her music video's, theme's, and lyrics all have an artistic message, and I could say how she has introduced surreal fashion and has turned into a collage of all that is modern society. How she critiques our worship of celebrities, and how this un-healthy obsession is destroying the nation. How she expresses and reveals the true nature of teenage agnst in the Born This Way album. But you do0n't want to listen to that, because she's just an attention whore, and another bubblegum pop in the millions.


      The Mother Monster symbol you mentioned before is the only decent theme and persona she's invented. But, as it was pointed out before, it came a little late and her previous stuff is not exactly symbolic, unless you consider love and sex, the most clichéd themes to address in music, symbolic.
      And also, her critique towards celebrity worship is once again a ploy to get more attention. If everyone thinks she's this unselfish being who thinks you shouldn't worship her, then everyone swarms to her. Smart move, I'll give her that.
      And yes, I won't listen to Born This Way purely because I give my money to artists who do not dress in attention-seeking outfits and sing original stuff -- people who actually deserve some fame and money.

      Sarah wrote:

      OWL CITY IS HORRIBLE. EVERYTHING IS HORRIBLE. HIS FACE, HIS LYRICS, THE BEATS HE MAKES WITH FUCKING GARAGE BAND.

      RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE. :mad:


      Like I care. Shut the fuck up and make me a sandwich.
    • Re: Lady Gaga

      I find it interesting that someone could so blatantly state that GaGa has no talent. Then again, the meaning of "talent" is quite varied from individual to individual. Her singing bleeds with beauty and power, and her creative ability seems to be amazing. I don't want to say that the ability to play the piano so beautifuly is a talent since it is such a common ability these days, but GaGa is very good at this as well. She can create lyrics with such deep meaning that you must actually "think" about what you are hearing to fully comprehend the string of words that are being said to you. And I adore this trait about her music.

      Of course anyone can spew random crap into a microphone and put it out there, but the fact that she goes on to actually explain the true meanings of her songs and that her meaning is so interesting makes her such a lovely person. Her music is not like other Pop music out there. It is not just "I wanna fuck you all night long", "Lets go to the club and have some fun!", it is truly different. German in a club song from an American artist? French. Spanish. And she makes it all sounds so lovely. With power, passion and meaining behind it all.

      Her outrageous clothes are quite beautiful in my eyes. They are creative, artisic, odd ans beyond different. They are GaGa. I hate thinking that she would wear them only for the attention, and not from a fashion point of view. I honestly assume that she does it for both. She adores fashion; she has a song titled "Fashion". She wants her music to be remixed for fashion shows and she even rips the runway herself. Fashion is no stranger to GaGa, and she likes being soaked in some dirty attention as well.

      Now I always question celebs when it comes to being these caring people who want to "help" us with their money, and provide these figures who fight for us on a large scale. As much as I want to I just don't know if GaGa truly cares about the monsters of this world (the different, hated, outed). I often think to myself "Is she just doing this for the publicity?"... I mean, does she truly care about me being a gay and hated? However, even if it is just for the publicity and the retina-glued attention, you have to realize that she is at least doing something at all. She is fighting for us, whether it be geniune or not. And because she does it with music as well, it makes her more noticable than the other gay lovers out there. Artist seem to avoid such contriversal and odd subjects, but she does not. She blatantly sings about it whether you like it or not. She touches herself to lavender blonds all through the night in her music.


      I love Madre Monster. Her oddness is delicious. The hate she is drenched with is yummy to lick off of her. She is simply a captivating Pop bitch. And I'm just a holy fool following an attention whore. She is all what most Gay people adore. A fashion obsessed creative attention whore that "pretends" to fight for what we believe in. It should be easy to see where her worship comes from whether you agree with this love or not.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/CENTER]

      The post was edited 3 times, last by OverlyCreative ().

    • Re: Lady Gaga

      TombGeek, you have a weird definition of a gay icon. Someone who supports, is a massive part of and minor celebrity of the gay community is totally different to being a gay icon. Many gay icon's haven't even mentioned the gay community in their work. Ever. A gay con s a female musician or actor who is adored and worshipped by a small gay community. That's it. And GaGa, fills into that niche.

      I don't think you can't say she isn't an artist when you won't even fucking listen to her music. And technically most artists are attention whores, it's called exhibitionism. Check out Orlan, or Dali', or the Scary Guy. All artists who express outrageous differentiation to send a message. Plus, you completely missed the idea that she is being an attention whore to be ironic, just listen to the Poker Face lyrics, Beautiful, Dirty, Rich e.t.c. Or even her religious connotations to delve into what it means to have faith, or feeling disgusted with yourself.

      And really, what makes her any more narcisstic than Katty Perry, or Britney Spears or Kesha, or any number of no talent millionaires who call themselves "artists". If GaGa was some deeply underground unknown and bizzare performance artist, than no-one would be complaining, if she was just like Empire of the Sun, or Patrick Wolf, no-one would complain.

      Oh and Dan Savage is still a dick. Snails & Oysters: Dan Savage is Biphobic | People, Celebrities, Actors & Profiles Of Gay & Bisexual Men In Movies, TV Shows & Music | AfterElton.com

      How can you say that she has an "agenda" for supporting the gay community, when you have never even fucking met her or even talked to her. That's just a wild assumption fuelled by your blatantly biased views in your blind hate against her work.

      So that's my two cents. Everyone has their own opinion. But hey ho. No-one's outcasting you for being gay and not liking her, no-one is. And so what if her performances are over-the-top, since when does art have to be modest?

      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

      The post was edited 3 times, last by cazoofoo ().

    • Re: Lady Gaga

      cazoofoo wrote:

      TombGeek, you have a weird definition of a gay icon. Someone who supports, is a massive part of and minor celebrity of the gay community is totally different to being a gay icon. Many gay icon's haven't even mentioned the gay community in their work. Ever. A gay con s a female musician or actor who is adored and worshipped by a small gay community. That's it. And GaGa, fills into that niche.


      Why does a gay icon have to be female? Your previous reason made no sense whatsoever.
      I'm sorry, but an icon for me is someone who strives to make a difference. Shaking your ass on stage is not making a difference.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      I don't think you can't say she isn't an artist when you won't even fucking listen to her music.


      I have. Do you know how many times they play her songs on the radio? Also, I have a few of her songs because a friend of mine (who is gay as well) begged me to listen to it.
      I've seen her music videos, particularly Bad Romance, Judas and Born This Way.
      I don't hate the songs, but they're overrated in my opinion and I find rock music more satisfying. Like I said, they're catchy and enjoyable, but it doesn't go further than that.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      And technically most mainstream artists are attention whores, it's called exhibitionism.


      Fix'd

      cazoofoo wrote:

      And really, what makes her any more narcisstic than Katty Perry, or Britney Spears or Kesha, or any number of no talent millionaires who call themselves "artists". If GaGa was some deeply underground unknown and bizzare performance artist, than no-one would be complaining, if she was just like Empire of the Sun, or Patrick Wolf, no-one would complain.


      I said in my first post that Lady Gaga can sing and is talented. She is, however, overrated, just like Perry, Spears and Kesha.



      Firstly, the writers on AfterElton are known to editorialise in their articles. I've read a lot from AE and, to be honest, I'd die of shock if the writers could be any more biased. I once read an article about Stephen King's Cell and I wanted to stab the writer in the face, because most of his facts were wrong. I mean, read through the comments.

      While not being a huge fan of Savage, I have to say I understand why he did not choose to reply to this material. While some of the examples used are quite accurate, much is edited, excerpted, and taken out of context.
      Secondly, just because Dan Savage is not a huge fan of bisexuals doesn't automatically make him a "dick." Yes, his opinions may be uninformed and prejudice, but that doesn't mean what he has done should be cast aside just because he has some bisexual butthurt.
      While I'm neither condone nor support bi-phobia, I kind of understand where he's coming from. Bisexual people do have a bad reputation. I'd even be wary when dating a bisexual person. Unless I absolutely trust the person will be monogamous, I'd avoid getting into a long-term relationship with them. But that's a general rule of thumb -- whether gay, straight or bisexual.
      However, that is besides the point. I'm not Savage's greatest fan, but I feel he has done more for the community than Lady Gaga.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      How can you say that she has an "agenda" for supporting the gay community, when you have never even fucking met her or even talked to her. That's just a wild assumption fuelled by your blatantly biased views in your blind hate against her work.


      I don't hate her work. Like I said, she can sing. I just don't like her lyrics and I don't understand the obsession over her.
      And I may not know her personally, but think of it this way. She may or may not have an agenda. Perhaps she really does care. But from my perspective, judging by her obsession with being noticed, I feel that it's a mere publicity stunt. I mean, come on, a meat dress? And arriving in an egg? Sorry, but that screams "attention whore." And I doubt Lady Gaga would have supported the community if she knew it would destroy her career. She knew that, by doing so, she would gain even more publicity and thus gain more fans, thus gaining profit. See where I'm getting at?

      ---------- Post added at 01:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:47 PM ----------

      Sarah wrote:

      Why, is there not enough meat between RMG's legs? :rob:


      What meat? You chewed it all before I could get some. :rob:

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Tomb ().

    • Re: Lady Gaga

      But how do you know she demands to be noticed?

      And again, your thinking of a celebrity with support of gay rights. That's not an icon. Read up on it, you don't know what a gay icon is. A gay icon is not obliged to do anything for the community.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by cazoofoo ().

    • Re: Lady Gaga

      cazoofoo wrote:

      But how do you know she demands to be noticed?


      It's blatantly obvious.

      cazoofoo wrote:

      And again, your thinking of a celebrity with support of gay rights. That's not an icon. Read up on it, you don't know what a gay icon is. A gay icon is not obliged to do anything for the community.


      i·con/ˈīkän/Noun

      1. A painting of Christ or another holy figure, used as an aid to devotion in the Byzantine and other Eastern Churches.
      2. A person or thing regarded as a representative symbol of something: "icon of manhood".

      Lady Gaga is now a representative symbol for the gay community?