From: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org (mad-mission-digest) To: mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Subject: mad-mission-digest V3 #151 Reply-To: mad-mission@smoe.org Sender: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * mad-mission-digest-request@smoe.org * with ONLY the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * For the latest information on Patty's tour dates, go to: * http://www.spectra.net/~ducksoup/pattyg/patttyg.htm * OR * go to http://www.amrecords.com * then click "tour" and fill in the blanks :) * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: mad-mission-digest V3 #xxx or the like gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. mad-mission-digest Thursday, May 20 1999 Volume 03 : Number 151 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [Fwd: MM: Was Tony Gay?] ["Victoria Chenevey" ] MM: Patty and Melissa Ferrick..oh and tape trading [Mystchif1@aol.com] MM: Re: mad-mission-digest V3 #147 [Twan68@aol.com] MM: Was Tony Gay or a Geek? [Wendy J ] MM: Re: NPC: stereotypes [rblack1@io.com (Ronda B.)] MM: Plain ole mad [Han ] MM: Does it matter if Tony Was Gay or a Geek? [Han ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:00:30 -0700 From: "Victoria Chenevey" Subject: Re: [Fwd: MM: Was Tony Gay?] yes. Vickie - ---------- > From: hilah@ix.netcom.com > To: mad-mission@smoe.org > Subject: [Fwd: MM: Was Tony Gay?] > Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 4:24 PM > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:02:17 -0700 From: "Victoria Chenevey" Subject: MM: Re: Re: NPC: No requests policy <<< Subject: MM: Re: NPC: stereotypes Ok, I've read a bunch of posts tonight, so I want to make sure I get this straight. Wendy said <<< " I was particularly > >> touched when I saw her last winter in georgetown and > >> these two very gap/j-crew looking guys who I assumed > >> were straight preppy college kids put their arms > >> around each other and started swaying back and forth > >> when she played "sweet lorraine." it was so cute!" Then Judy said >>this is a bit irritating....... can someone say stereotype? i could go > >on and say many things explaining why this comment irritated me, but I > >think I should just leave it alone..... i'm not sure why its necessary > >for you to judge these "gap/j-crew looking guys" and then decide that > >they are "cute" if they're gay?????? what has the world come to? Then Ronda said >Wow, Judy, this is really harsh. I liked Wendy's post and don't think it > said anything horrible. Since when did saying they looked like "JCrew guys" > become offensive? There's a number of ways that could be taken. Lighten up. And then Judy said <<< I don't need queerness to be the focus of music I listen to. In fact, >when >the Indigo Girls went more in that direction I got turned off. Life is >stories and stories include all kinds of people!! > >Han >> >I have to agree, I am lesbian and I don't care what a performer's sexual >orientation is-- I do! No one would ever complain about a heterosexual performer singing about his/her respective boyfriend/girlfriend. To hear Amy and Emily sing about loving another woman is a huge step in the right direction. I hardly think you could find someone who has gone overboard expressing their homosexuality in song. We have been silent so long, it's time that people heard what we had to say about our lives in our music. If you have a problem with people expressing their sexuality in music, tell Mariah, Whitney, Cher, Irving Berlin, Kermit the damn frog, Ricky Martin, Dar Williams, Nanci Griffith, Andy Griffith, James Taylor, Andy Taylor, Taylor Dayne, TLC, The Spice Girls, The New Edition and Gladys Knight and the friggin' Pips. And the Indigo Girls just keep getting better and better since their music had become more honest ( and I have been a fan since I used to go see them at the Little Five Points Pub in Atlanta.) Why should they not sing about loving other women. Why should Rufus W. not sing about guys he loves. This sounds like people aren't comfortable with homosexuality and would like to not hear about it. Too bad. As part of the ten per cent, I say it's about time we had a musical voice. If " Life is stories and stories include all kinds of people!! " that includes homosexuals, not all of whom like to be referred to as "queer". That word still means strange and I am not strange. I just like boy crotch and not girl crotch. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 06:40:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Wendy J Subject: MM: Was Tony Gay or a Geek? Interesting question, Mr. Seth.... I have always assumed that Tony was in fact gay, but now that you mention it, it's entirely possible that he wasn't. As Seth said, Tony simply didn't conform to what was considered "cool" and the norm -- he was a goody-goody, always raising his hand in class, doing his homework, etc. Also, he was overweight and had "breasts like a girl." So it's possible that Tony's only "crime" was not being attractive or cool enough or homogenous enough. He was a geek, probably, and for that, he was ostricized. Maybe he wasn't gay. I guess at that age, not fitting in/being accepted and being labled as a "faggot" or "dyke" (regardless of one's sexual orientation) is just about the worst label you can have at that age ~ it implies that you're different and not "part of." Personally, I think that those words, as well as "fat pig" and "ugly" are just about the cruelest insults -- not because it's shameful to be overweight, gay or even unattractive, but because those words are often fueled by hate and contempt. Tony, whoever he was, probably heard those words all the time and eventually came to believe them: he "looked in the mirror and saw that little faggot staring back," and, well, we all know the rest.... anways, just my humble $0.02 ~ WJ - - - -- Victoria Chenevey wrote: > yes. > > Vickie > > ---------- > > From: hilah@ix.netcom.com > > To: mad-mission@smoe.org > > Subject: [Fwd: MM: Was Tony Gay?] > > Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 4:24 PM > > > > > > > _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 07:47:31 -0500 From: rblack1@io.com (Ronda B.) Subject: MM: Re: NPC: stereotypes Well, I think Vickie has it. To me, Judy's comments about Wendy's post were harsh, and they were harsh to Wendy personally as opposed to sticking to the subject matter. I do, however, realize I made the same error in suggesting Judy lighten up. So, perhaps a collective laugh/deep breath and a round of 'One Big Love' IS the answer. Meant noooo bad feelings and hope we've now restored peace, Ronda At 11:16 PM 5/19/99 -0700, Victoria Chenevey wrote: >Ok, I've read a bunch of posts tonight, so I want to make sure I get this >straight. > >Wendy said ><<< " I was particularly >> >> touched when I saw her last winter in georgetown and >> >> these two very gap/j-crew looking guys who I assumed >> >> were straight preppy college kids put their arms >> >> around each other and started swaying back and forth >> >> when she played "sweet lorraine." it was so cute!" > >Then Judy said >>>this is a bit irritating....... can someone say stereotype? i could go >> >on and say many things explaining why this comment irritated me, but I >> >think I should just leave it alone..... i'm not sure why its necessary >> >for you to judge these "gap/j-crew looking guys" and then decide that >> >they are "cute" if they're gay?????? what has the world come to? > >Then Ronda said >>Wow, Judy, this is really harsh. I liked Wendy's post and don't think it >> said anything horrible. Since when did saying they looked like "JCrew >guys" >> become offensive? There's a number of ways that could be taken. Lighten >up. > >And then Judy said ><<horrible ><then Judy apologized and said some sweet things. > >I get lost when Judy says that Wendy *totally made it sound like a horrible >thing*. Maybe Judy's email editor works different than mine, because I >didn't characterize *I was totally touched, etc* as horrible. Wendy didn't >*totally make it sound* like anything. It's our interpretation, our own >self-talk, that colors what we hear and read. This is a great list, and we >go off on some great tangents, and when I no longer want to listen to other >people on the list, I'll subscribe to the news-only digest version. But >this is way too fun, and the diversity only makes it more so. Instead of a >*no-tape-trading* policy, maybe we can each institute our own *no personal >attacks* policy. > >Vickie > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:08:04 -0400 From: Han Subject: MM: Plain ole mad In reference to the discussion related below, I say: that's the point... Sexuality expression should be a part of any musician's music, no matter what the orientation. It will be a nice day, I think, when it doesn't have to be a big deal that the musician is queer or not... that's what I'm saying. I personally have been less pleased with the Indigo Girls since they started singing less aobut feelings, and more about "gayness" as a socio-political construct. I *want* to hear about them loving women, because I love women too (hello? I am not str8 as you seem to think). I want them to use the dang personal pronouns her and she...! I just don't want to hear "..la la they hate me b/c I'm gay...la la". THat's just a bit intellectualized for my lyrical taste. Sorry about the queer thing. In my university community here in Providence/Boston, that's what we use as the blanket term for LGBT's. We have supposedly "reclaimed" the word. I am sorry I was not sterile enough with my semantics for you but it's not an offensive word where I am... Han Han: >><< I don't need queerness to be the focus of music I listen to. In fact, >>when >>the Indigo Girls went more in that direction I got turned off. Life is >>stories and stories include all kinds of people!! >>I have to agree, I am lesbian and I don't care what a performer's sexual >>orientation is-- Mr. Unsigned Twan68: >I do! No one would ever complain about a heterosexual performer singing about >his/her respective boyfriend/girlfriend. To hear Amy and Emily sing about >loving another woman is a huge step in the right direction. I hardly think >you could find someone who has gone overboard expressing their homosexuality >in song. We have been silent so long, it's time that people heard what we had >to say about our lives in our music. > >If you have a problem with people expressing their sexuality in music, tell >Mariah, Whitney, Cher, Irving Berlin, Kermit the damn frog, Ricky Martin, Dar >Williams, Nanci Griffith, Andy Griffith, James Taylor, Andy Taylor, Taylor >Dayne, TLC, The Spice Girls, The New Edition and Gladys Knight and the >friggin' Pips. > >And the Indigo Girls just keep getting better and better since their music >had become more honest ( and I have been a fan since I used to go see them at >the Little Five Points Pub in Atlanta.) Why should they not sing about loving >other women. Why should Rufus W. not sing about guys he loves. This sounds >like people aren't comfortable with homosexuality and would like to not hear >about it. Too bad. As part of the ten per cent, I say it's about time we had >a musical voice. > >If " Life is stories and stories include all kinds of people!! " that >includes homosexuals, not all of whom like to be referred to as "queer". That >word still means strange and I am not strange. I just like boy crotch and not >girl crotch. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:16:35 -0400 From: Han Subject: MM: Does it matter if Tony Was Gay or a Geek? Does it really matter what Tony was? Perhaps Tony was too young to even know himself. Maybe he was gay, maybe he wasn't. The point being: if you show any signs of being different as an adolescent, you are *strongly* discouraged from exploring who you are at best, and heavily influenced to hate and loathe things that may or may not be fundamental to who you are before oyu even get a chance to know... It seems to me Patty's intention was to convey the intense pain of Tony, and cruelty of the world toward "difference" of any kind. It never has mattered to me whether he was gay or not. Patty is even clever enough to point out the way there is a slot in every community (at least one slot) waiting for "the local fag"... "death comes to the local fag" is like: well, you know our town has a pathetic, lost adolescent who everyone thought was gay, and he shot himself--there's the proof..." to me, that just shows the mercilessness of the socital paradigm of conformity: i.e., Tony couldn't be "fat" and different" w/o being picked on, and then he's "the tormented homosexual boy who killed himself" in "the local rag..." Tony probably wasn't even sure of who Tony was. That's why it's damn brilliant, I think! (Especially acoustic at the Iron Horse in Northhampton) Han ------------------------------ End of mad-mission-digest V3 #151 *********************************