OldFriends4Sale said:

1725topp said:

*

That's nice, but you still haven't shown a post where you referenced Lavax at any other time than when asserting that Prince was never really concerned with issues specific to the African-American community. That is--when you use Lavax as a metaphor or a reference point, it seems to be when you are attempting to show that Prince never really had any interest in connecting with the African-American community. So, don't get bent out of shape with me 'cause I called you on your "racial BS."

*

Yes, other than Prince and Jerome, there are hardly any black people in Under the Cherry Moon of any real significance other than backdrop or stock characters. So, you can post your pics again, but they will all be of backdrop and stock characters. Of course, that may be fine with you because you seem to want a world in which black people are merely backdrop and stock characters. Thus, when you compare two black primary characters with other white primary characters, such as Mary, her father, her mother, Katy, Ms. Wellington, two of the Jaded Three, and the police inspector, then the point stands that there are barely any black people in the film of any real consequence.

*

You are lying. I never said that Prince should not have had a white woman as his love interest. I said that it sent a negative message/image about black beauty for Prince, as an African American, to create a film in which two African-American men chase a white woman for an hour and a half and then have his character scared into honesty by a black woman. If you are going to recount what I’ve said, at least tell the truth. See, unlike you, I don’t have a problem standing behind what I’ve said/written.

*

I simply noted that if you were so focused about the issue of "sexuality" you would have said "sexuality BS," but instead you said "racial BS." Again, don't be mad at me because your words speak clearly for you.

*

Peace player.

4. The article head is GAYEST BLACK the person was pushing something racial and sexual. Why do I need to defend it to you? This is all clear your swetting me dude, get off the jock, leave the arguement in the other thread. I have my belief and it ain't wrong because you have yours.

*

1. You mentioned Lavax in this thread. I commented on your use of Lavax in this thread along with your use of "racial BS." See post #22 when I stated: “As for preferring to be in Lavax, Prince also wanted to March, wanted to quote MLK and be Emancipated, wanted us to Be Moved when black babies made the grade and still didn't get the job, wanted us to understand the racism of Abraham Lincoln, and many more issues about which wrote that were directly related to the specific plight of African Americans.” I only asked that you provide threads about you discussing Lavax in a non-racial manner when you refuted the notion of you focusing more on “race” than “sexuality.” As such, my initial comment was that, while Prince did write songs like "Lavax," he also wrote songs that addressed issues specific to the African-American community. Therefore, articles pertaining to the issue of Prince and race cannot just be summarily dismissed as “racial BS” just because you want to act like Prince was not interested in issues specific to the African-American community. It would seem that the more appropriate response to the article is that “the author, in his desperate attempt to find black gay representation, is reaching at straws by identifying Christopher Tracey as the gayest black character of the 80s because the character is clearly heterosexual.” Since no one is disputing Christopher's "blackness," then what seems to be at dispute is his "gayness." So, if what's being disputed is his "gayness," then it would seem that the most effective response to the article is "sexuality BS" rather than "racial BS."

*

2. There are lots of thriving people of African descent in France who identify as Afro-French. The estimate is anywhere from 1.3 to 1.6 million Afro-French, with many in high local and national positions. As such, a film in France starring two African-Americans could well highlight the African diaspora to show people of African descent in every aspect of French life. There are plenty Afro-French Mary Sharons so the issue of the film being set in France is moot. Additionally, other than Prince and Jerome, there are no other significant black characters in Under the Cherry Moon, depending on how one counts the black woman used to scare Christopher into honesty. Yet, one could argue that she is "significant" since my issue is that the use of her sends a negative message about black beauty, which was my "original" point that you keep trying to deny was my original point.

*

3. Keep reaching at straws player. If a Mexican woman is presented as the symbol of beauty and another Mexican woman is the symbol of fear or ugliness, then that's not demonizing one cultural notion of beauty to uplift another. My original point was that to use a black woman as an object of fear when two African-American men had just spent an hour and a half chasing a white woman as the symbol of beauty articulates a negative message about black beauty. Had the object of fear been a white woman, then that would not have preferenced one cultural notion of beauty over another. But, as long as the film shows one race as an image of beauty and another race as the juxtaposing image of negativity, then that sends a negative message about the latter race. The issue is not who the love interest is; the issue is that a black image is presented/juxtaposed in a negative manner to uplift a white beauty. Other than that, I don't have a problem with the film, but I'm not going to ignore something that perpetuates a negative stereotype of black beauty.

*

4. Still doesn't change the fact that you wrote "racial BS" and not "sexuality BS." This is not about another tread. You said "racial BS" in this thread, and I commented on your use of "racial BS" in this thread rather than “sexuality BS.” Don't be mad at me because your slip is showing.

1725topp said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

1. let the Lavax thing go. Do you seriously think ..

*

1. You mentioned Lavax in this thread. I commented on your...

You guys have taken over this thread in a way that I find to be inappropriate. This article is about a serious topic: the lack of Black Gay Male representation in movies, and the author mentions Prince as a point of reference for the Black Gay Male Viewer. Let's stay on topic. If you want to fight, just org note each other.

JudasLChrist said:

1725topp said:

*

1. You mentioned Lavax in this thread. I commented on your...

You guys have taken over this thread in a way that I find to be inappropriate. This article is about a serious topic: the lack of Black Gay Male representation in movies, and the author mentions Prince as a point of reference for the Black Gay Male Viewer. Let's stay on topic. If you want to fight, just org note each other.

not my fight, 1725topp is bring this. I've been discussing the topic in multiple posts

OldFriends4Sale said:

JudasLChrist said:

You guys have taken over this thread in a way that I find to be inappropriate. This article is about a serious topic: the lack of Black Gay Male representation in movies, and the author mentions Prince as a point of reference for the Black Gay Male Viewer. Let's stay on topic. If you want to fight, just org note each other.

not my fight, 1725topp is bring this. I've been discussing the topic in multiple posts

*

I simply raised a question why OldFriends4Sale used the term "racial BS" and not "sexuality BS," and he lost his mind. I didn't know we weren't allowed to ask people to clarify their statements on a message board.

JudasLChrist said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

So is he just pandering by using Prince's passing to get attention for his article?

He's not pandering, he's a massive Prince fan.

Is there more to the article?
I mean he did not go into the Christopher Tracy character or Tricky character that supports using Prince/UTCM as the article title

[Edited 6/29/16 7:47am]

SchlomoThaHomo said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

SchlomoThaHomo said:

suomynona said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

paisleyparkgirl said:

I thought the kiss was acting. I hope he did not kiss anyone like that in real life.

Probably because of the position, it looked a bit messy

his movie kisses were always odd - too much lip, he didn't really get in there, betting that was just for the movies though... it's what he did to the pannies in this scene that counts

OldFriends4Sale said:

JudasLChrist said:

darkroman said:

The writer is clearly not an academic writer as he can't differentiate between gay and camp.

.

Maybe he should read up on cinema history before writing his article.

.

He is actually a film studies professor of some reknown.

The Tashmoo Lecture Series presents Stephen Winter

7PM, THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 2014

LIEBLING ROOM 120, HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE

Stephen Winter’s feature film debut as writer/director Chocolate Babies (1997( premiered at the 47th Annual Berlin Film Festival. He has worked with Lee Daniels on films such as The Butler (2913(, Precious (2009), The Paperboy (2012), and Shadowboxer (2005). He was lead producer of Jonathan Caouette’s landmark documentary Tarnation (2004) which screened at Sundance, Cannes, and was featured on the AFI DOCS Top 50 Documentaries to Watch Before You Die list. Winter was lead story editor forHow to Survive A Plague (23012), co-writer of New York, I Love You (2009), and an actor in the horror thrilled Kiss of the Damned (2013). His most recent directorial projects include a short film with M. Lama, Speculum Orum, and a short documentary called Death is Lame (2011). He received an M.F.A. from New York University and a B.F.A. from School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

Ok, I might be totally wrong here, but it seems to me that some people are mistaking Prince's "burlesque" style for gay. And before any of you jumps on your keyboards, may I just add that "burlesque" isn't originally about female cabaret strippers or travesties, although it became one of the many forms that burlesque took as it evolved throughout the 20th century.

No, I am referring to its original meaning:

"Burlesque is a literary, dramatic or musical work intended to cause laughter by caricaturing the manner or spirit of serious works, or by ludicrous treatment of their subjects.^[1] The word derives from the Italian burlesco, which, in turn, is derived from the Italian burla – a joke, ridicule or mockery.^[2]"

Wikipedia

I also think this acting style (and the dark make up) is very similar to Charlie Chaplin's comedies.

Prince often resorted a lot to this burlesque manerism when in concert. Watch Live at the Aladdin concert and you will see it a lot. He did that a lot at his 21 nights aftershows. He even did it the night he took my little card and hid it with great manerism inside his shirt, then after I said "it's not what you're thinking", he pretended to be extremely upset, rolled his eyes, looked around, pursed his lips, and threw it back into the crowd with an exasperated movement... It was indeed very funny (even though I would have preferred if he had kept the card in his shirt). Prince never ceased to jump into this excentric frivolous character when put under the spotlight.

I therefore think that his character in Under the Cherry Moon is very theatrical/ burlesque but not gay as such.

[Edited 6/29/16 7:05am]