OldFriends4Sale said:

purplefam99 said:

OldFriends4Sale said: Ha I and totally think he may have done it for fame. I'm telling ya The sector that had the extra cash to buy albums and tickets to shows Really liked those tasty bits. They aren't the only ones but certainly the one With allowances and disposable income. Allowance for chores for being a part Of the family I didn't get paid for that!

There was a thread about the Lovesexy cover a few years ago, and Prince talking about why he did it. Cat Glover shared some insight too. It doesn't seem to be about 'for the fame' I mean if you think about his static in why he did the Black album and that is contradictory.
.
Now him pulling in Tony M incorporating a 'gansta lean' to his image(just a touch) and music was for the fame.

.

But posing naked on the cover and increasing the androgeny in 1988/89 with the changes happening in pop culture could not. I think it was simply Prince just like his innocence at singing Jack U Off (Dez Dickerson said he really didn't understand that men don't jack off women). It wasn't an act.

*

I get and agree with what you are saying to a degree, but I'm not understanding how one thing can be acting a bit and the other cannot be. I think that Prince has always employed just as much machismo in his "act" as he has employed androgyny. And, I'd go further and agree with Miles Davis that Prince used the androgyny as a way to cloak his machismo, which often became borderline misogyny; we have all cringed at the “I’m going to have to rape you” line from “Extraloveable” even though most of us knew that fool wasn’t serious. Or, as Davis puts it, because of his androgyny, "Prince can say 'I wanna fuck the taste out of your mouth,’ and everyone thinks it’s cute. If I say that shit it's time to call the police." Sure, by incorporating Tony M, Prince was definitely responding to the musical changes of the times, but, if Hip Hop is merely an extension of R&B, and machismo/misogyny are historical components of R&B, then using Tony M and the whole "gansta" or "urban music swag" was also Prince being/exploring various natural aspects of himself while also trying to remain current. Remember the line from the extended version of “Let’s Work,” “My dick and bubble gum is all you get.” That was a hood staple for dudes who saw themselves as hardcore Mack Players. As 2Pac said, “I wanted to have lots of beautiful bad-ass women because Prince had lots of beautiful bad-ass women,” and you know 2Pac was referring to Prince’s work and imagery before Tony M entered into the picture. As such, for me, it's not about choosing one aspect of Prince over the other, but making it clear that a lot of what Prince was doing was calculated--even posing nude on the Lovesexy cover (which I love) because he knew it would get a rise or cause controversy while also being a perfect symbol for the album's themes--especially as he was perceiving himself as an African-American male in a world (America) in which African-American males are limited by the white supremacist power structure. Hell, I’m a straight African-American male, but I like women’s dress socks more than I do men’s dress socks because they look sleeker, are more stylish, and are more comfortable. And, I’ll wear a shiny shirt before a t-shirt even in the middle of a hot-ass Mississippi summer. We all have various sides to ourselves, and, at given moments, we all extend or “play up” those sides for one reason or another. I just think that it’s important to know that Prince was both a musical and cultural genius because as an African-American male he understood the issues that he could address/exploit to sell records and have impactful discussions. I'm not going to begrudge a brother for being calculating to sell records as long as within some of those records he has something insightful to say, even if I don't always agree with what he says or how he says it. And, like all experimenting artist, of course he’s going to create something or do something that some of us don’t like or feel a need to question. But, that’s just the nature of being a fan of a man who had a lot to say and wasn’t that interested in whom he pissed off, including his fans; remember “F.U.N.K.” or “PFUnk”? The fact that all of us have some personalized fandom at stake in all of this just functions to show that Prince was insightfully creative and moreso than most.

PeteSilas said:

i believe it's possible he said what he said because he might have been embarrassed by some of the things in his past. It's perfectly understandable, i tell people "imagine if you had cameras following you everywhere in your early twenties, you'd be pretty embarrassed by some of it too". Humping the stage, ass hanging out, rubbing up on the guys in the band, wearing a dress, it's bound to make you a little self conscious in an interview. so.., "i was just playing".

1725topp said:

*

So, when Prince says in the VH1 to 1 Interview with Chris Rock, to Rock's question about the androgyny, that "There was a lot of acting going on as well," should we not take Prince at his word? What one person calls contrived, another person may call calculating. But, Prince, based on this and many other statements that he has made, was definitely manipulating America's obsession, fear, and anxiety with race and sexuality. I’m not saying that he was a fake or a phony, but as an African-American man he definitely seemed to understand that he needed to navigate/manipulate the white power structure, and androgyny is one way to do it. And, before we evoke the name David Bowie, let’s remember that Little Richard crafted that blueprint long before Bowie. What Bowie did for shock value and to have some real conversations about gender, Little Richard did for survival because that was the only way that white men would not lynch him for white girls screaming at his shows. And, those are Little Richard’s words, not mine.

*

I can't disprove your point empirically so I must accept it as plausible but not probable because, other than the use of profanity, Prince never seemed publically to regret much. Also, even after becoming a Jehovah's Witness, he never stopped being sexual but only asserted that one can be a freak just be a married freak. As we all mature, we think about the wild things we did during our past and cringe, but that doesn't mean that we wouldn't do them again or that we would be so embarrassed by them as to deny them. I would never dress the way that I dressed when I was eighteen, but I don't deny that I dressed that way nor am I embarrassed by it though I'm sure some of the young ladies who dated me might still be embarrassed. That being said, Prince just never struck me as being embarrassed by his past. Even when he was making the statement on VH1 to 1, he was wearing makeup and heels.

sometimes he just seemed like he went too far the other way as a backlash against his past, the statements about gays a few years ago, the changing of lyrics, the overall conservatism which, if one followed him like i did, always saw glimpses of. He did what he had to do in those days too, MJ did too, Rick James was a comparable talent and he had much more limited success because he was pretty uncompromising in his masculinity and his bawdiness. In the eighties it was easy to overlook the effects that race had on black megastar's careers because they were huge but if you look closely you see the signs that they had to somehow emasculate or minimize their sexuality. Eddie Murphy had to be seen as a non-sexual, non-romantic figure in his biggest hit, Beverly Hills Cop, which was originally meant for stallone and he would have had a romantic interest in the film.

1725topp said:

PeteSilas said:

i believe it's possible he said what he said because he might have been embarrassed by some of the things in his past. It's perfectly understandable, i tell people "imagine if you had cameras following you everywhere in your early twenties, you'd be pretty embarrassed by some of it too". Humping the stage, ass hanging out, rubbing up on the guys in the band, wearing a dress, it's bound to make you a little self conscious in an interview. so.., "i was just playing".

*

I can't disprove your point empirically so I must accept it as plausible but not probable because, other than the use of profanity, Prince never seemed publically to regret much. Also, even after becoming a Jehovah's Witness, he never stopped being sexual but only asserted that one can be a freak just be a married freak. As we all mature, we think about the wild things we did during our past and cringe, but that doesn't mean that we wouldn't do them again or that we would be so embarrassed by them as to deny them. I would never dress the way that I dressed when I was eighteen, but I don't deny that I dressed that way nor am I embarrassed by it though I'm sure some of the young ladies who dated me might still be embarrassed. That being said, Prince just never struck me as being embarrassed by his past. Even when he was making the statement on VH1 to 1, he was wearing makeup and heels.

SquirrelMeat said:

rogifan said:

Going through some old threads on live shows and it’s just one complaint after another (with his new music sucks thrown in for good measure). The set lists are boring, same songs, too many covers, sampler set is stupid, too many singers on stage blah blah blah, bitch bitch bitch. Good lord I can only imagine what the bitching will be like once valet music starts being released.

purplefam99 said:

purplefam99 said:

OldFriends4Sale said: Forgive the misquote a little acting.

No to answer your question.

Does the bolded constitute flame bait??

if not lets leave the testiness out. please.

come on, no one is being 'testy'

that was a genuine question.
some people are, just like there are some fans who are uncomfortable with Prince's more overt sexual expression and song. We've talked about that stuff before. I was suprised, being the nature of who Prince is.

1725topp said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

There was a thread about the Lovesexy cover a few years ago, and Prince talking about why he did it. Cat Glover shared some insight too. It doesn't seem to be about 'for the fame' I mean if you think about his static in why he did the Black album and that is contradictory.
.
Now him pulling in Tony M incorporating a 'gansta lean' to his image(just a touch) and music was for the fame.

.

But posing naked on the cover and increasing the androgeny in 1988/89 with the changes happening in pop culture could not. I think it was simply Prince just like his innocence at singing Jack U Off (Dez Dickerson said he really didn't understand that men don't jack off women). It wasn't an act.

*

I get and agree with what you are saying to a degree, but I'm not understanding how one thing can be acting a bit and the other cannot be. I think that Prince has always employed just as much machismo in his "act" as he has employed androgyny. And, I'd go further and agree with Miles Davis that Prince used the androgyny as a way to cloak his machismo, which often became borderline misogyny; we have all cringed at the “I’m going to have to rape you” line from “Extraloveable” even though most of us knew that fool wasn’t serious. Or, as Davis puts it, because of his androgyny, "Prince can say 'I wanna fuck the taste out of your mouth,’ and everyone thinks it’s cute. If I say that shit it's time to call the police." Sure, by incorporating Tony M, Prince was definitely responding to the musical changes of the times, but, if Hip Hop is merely an extension of R&B, and machismo/misogyny are historical components of R&B, then using Tony M and the whole "gansta" or "urban music swag" was also Prince being/exploring various natural aspects of himself while also trying to remain current. Remember the line from the extended version of “Let’s Work,” “My dick and bubble gum is all you get.” That was a hood staple for dudes who saw themselves as hardcore Mack Players. As 2Pac said, “I wanted to have lots of beautiful bad-ass women because Prince had lots of beautiful bad-ass women,” and you know 2Pac was referring to Prince’s work and imagery before Tony M entered into the picture. As such, for me, it's not about choosing one aspect of Prince over the other, but making it clear that a lot of what Prince was doing was calculated--even posing nude on the Lovesexy cover (which I love) because he knew it would get a rise or cause controversy while also being a perfect symbol for the album's themes--especially as he was perceiving himself as an African-American male in a world (America) in which African-American males are limited by the white supremacist power structure. Hell, I’m a straight African-American male, but I like women’s dress socks more than I do men’s dress socks because they look sleeker, are more stylish, and are more comfortable. And, I’ll wear a shiny shirt before a t-shirt even in the middle of a hot-ass Mississippi summer. We all have various sides to ourselves, and, at given moments, we all extend or “play up” those sides for one reason or another. I just think that it’s important to know that Prince was both a musical and cultural genius because as an African-American male he understood the issues that he could address/exploit to sell records and have impactful discussions. I'm not going to begrudge a brother for being calculating to sell records as long as within some of those records he has something insightful to say, even if I don't always agree with what he says or how he says it. And, like all experimenting artist, of course he’s going to create something or do something that some of us don’t like or feel a need to question. But, that’s just the nature of being a fan of a man who had a lot to say and wasn’t that interested in whom he pissed off, including his fans; remember “F.U.N.K.” or “PFUnk”? The fact that all of us have some personalized fandom at stake in all of this just functions to show that Prince was insightfully creative and moreso than most.

i echo this sentiment, however short and quickly to the point my statements are.

i am grateful to people who have the adequate time to formulate such well formed positions.

thank you for your time.

OldFriends4Sale said:

purplefam99 said:

No to answer your question.

Does the bolded constitute flame bait??

if not lets leave the testiness out. please.

come on, no one is being 'testy'

that was a genuine question.
some people are, just like there are some fans who are uncomfortable with Prince's more overt sexual expression and song. We've talked about that stuff before. I was suprised, being the nature of who Prince is.

well from my perspective it was a tad testy, cause i was simply trying to point out that he is

on record as saying there was "some or a little acting" in his performance history. and your

questioning me about queerness didnt seem at all necessary or about androgeny i don't see them

as always tied.

purplefam99 said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

come on, no one is being 'testy'

that was a genuine question.
some people are, just like there are some fans who are uncomfortable with Prince's more overt sexual expression and song. We've talked about that stuff before. I was suprised, being the nature of who Prince is.

well from my perspective it was a tad testy, cause i was simply trying to point out that he is

on record as saying there was "some or a little acting" in his performance history. and your

questioning me about queerness didnt seem at all necessary or about androgeny i don't see them

as always tied.

it's over purplefam

my question only came about because in 2 places you changed Prince's word from a "Little" to a "Lot". Queerness is not a definition of 'Gay'

It was just a question. It's over.

purplefam99 said:

PeteSilas said:

sometimes he just seemed like he went too far the other way as a backlash against his past, the statements about gays a few years ago, the changing of lyrics, the overall conservatism which, if one followed him like i did, always saw glimpses of. He did what he had to do in those days too, MJ did too, Rick James was a comparable talent and he had much more limited success because he was pretty uncompromising in his masculinity and his bawdiness. In the eighties it was easy to overlook the effects that race had on black megastar's careers because they were huge but if you look closely you see the signs that they had to somehow emasculate or minimize their sexuality. Eddie Murphy had to be seen as a non-sexual, non-romantic figure in his biggest hit, Beverly Hills Cop, which was originally meant for stallone and he would have had a romantic interest in the film.

1725topp said:

*

I can't disprove your point empirically so I must accept it as plausible but not probable because, other than the use of profanity, Prince never seemed publically to regret much. Also, even after becoming a Jehovah's Witness, he never stopped being sexual but only asserted that one can be a freak just be a married freak. As we all mature, we think about the wild things we did during our past and cringe, but that doesn't mean that we wouldn't do them again or that we would be so embarrassed by them as to deny them. I would never dress the way that I dressed when I was eighteen, but I don't deny that I dressed that way nor am I embarrassed by it though I'm sure some of the young ladies who dated me might still be embarrassed. That being said, Prince just never struck me as being embarrassed by his past. Even when he was making the statement on VH1 to 1, he was wearing makeup and heels.

*

I agree. I think it was in Raw that Murphy said, "Michael Jackson took Brook Shields to the Grammys, and y'all all applauded ‘cause y'all thought it was cute. That's ‘cause y'all knew Brooke wasn't gone get fucked later that night. Had Brooke been with me, it wouldn't have been so cute 'cause y'all would have known that Brooke was going to get fucked later that night." So, yes, most African-American artists have known that there is always a line of white racial anxiety that they must navigate. Thus, your point about Murphy not having a love interest in Beverley Hills Cop is excellent. In most cases, the black male actor was the womanless side-kick to the white hero.

*

As for Prince taking it too far in his backlash against his past, I guess it's relative to how each of us perceives it. The changing of the lyrics didn't bother me as much probably because, as a poet and short story writer, myself, I got to a point where I wanted to ensure that any profanity that I used was realistic and not gratuitous. I guess, as you allude to it, I always recognized the undercurrent Judeo-Christian ideology in his early work, with songs such as “Annie Christian” and even with “1999,” so him becoming more orthodox didn't surprise me as much. In fact, I was surprised by those who either didn't see his orthodoxy coming or couldn't fathom the possibility that he would become more orthodox. As for his post-JW statement about gays, while, of course, insensitive, it wasn't the first time he had distanced himself from the LGBT community. In 1981 in either the famed Boskamp or Mitchell interview, his answer to the question, "What's the most misunderstood thing about you?" is "that my real name is Prince and that people think that I'm gay." Of course, in this early interview, he is not, in any way, attacking the LGBT community, but he does seem to go out of his way to make this point. So, overall, it's just been the ebb and flow with Prince as to what aspect of his personality he felt like exploring or highlighting at any given moment. One thing all fans do know. Whatever Prince believed that particular day, he believed it to the fullest…until he decided to believe something else the next day.

1725topp said:

PeteSilas said:

sometimes he just seemed like he went too far the other way as a backlash against his past, the statements about gays a few years ago, the changing of lyrics, the overall conservatism which, if one followed him like i did, always saw glimpses of. He did what he had to do in those days too, MJ did too, Rick James was a comparable talent and he had much more limited success because he was pretty uncompromising in his masculinity and his bawdiness. In the eighties it was easy to overlook the effects that race had on black megastar's careers because they were huge but if you look closely you see the signs that they had to somehow emasculate or minimize their sexuality. Eddie Murphy had to be seen as a non-sexual, non-romantic figure in his biggest hit, Beverly Hills Cop, which was originally meant for stallone and he would have had a romantic interest in the film.

*

I agree. I think it was in Raw that Murphy said, "Michael Jackson took Brook Shields to the Grammys, and y'all all applauded ‘cause y'all thought it was cute. That's ‘cause y'all knew Brooke wasn't gone get fucked later that night. Had Brooke been with me, it wouldn't have been so cute 'cause y'all would have known that Brooke was going to get fucked later that night." So, yes, most African-American artists have known that there is always a line of white racial anxiety that they must navigate. Thus, your point about Murphy not having a love interest in Beverley Hills Cop is excellent. In most cases, the black male actor was the womanless side-kick to the white hero.

*

As for Prince taking it too far in his backlash against his past, I guess it's relative to how each of us perceives it. The changing of the lyrics didn't bother me as much probably because, as a poet and short story writer, myself, I got to a point where I wanted to ensure that any profanity that I used was realistic and not gratuitous. I guess, as you allude to it, I always recognized the undercurrent Judeo-Christian ideology in his early work, with songs such as “Annie Christian” and even with “1999,” so him becoming more orthodox didn't surprise me as much. In fact, I was surprised by those who either didn't see his orthodoxy coming or couldn't fathom the possibility that he would become more orthodox. As for his post-JW statement about gays, while, of course, insensitive, it wasn't the first time he had distanced himself from the LGBT community. In 1981 in either the famed Boskamp or Mitchell interview, his answer to the question, "What's the most misunderstood thing about you?" is "that my real name is Prince and that people think that I'm gay." Of course, in this early interview, he is not, in any way, attacking the LGBT community, but he does seem to go out of his way to make this point. So, overall, it's just been the ebb and flow with Prince as to what aspect of his personality he felt like exploring or highlighting at any given moment. One thing all fans do know. Whatever Prince believed that particular day, he believed it to the fullest…until he decided to believe something else the next day.

Perfectly illustrated by the rapidity with which he lost interest in his objects of desire...and his two wives.

lyrical changes didn't bother me at all but they sure bothered a lot of people here. They were an indication that he was changing. Hell, even in his prime, he went on record saying there was nothing wrong with the advisory label, which, was partially a reaction to him by tipper gore. So he's always had a contradiction thing going. And yes, he denied being gay in interviews in those days while he'd rub on andre and dez and make songs like when you were mine which could have easily been interpreted as a song about a threesome. Then the term "jack u off" which even as a teenager sounded gay to me, you don't jack women off. He played with it all, he probably felt embarrassed and definitely felt guilty (not that he really should have).

1725topp said:

PeteSilas said:

sometimes he just seemed like he went too far the other way as a backlash against his past, the statements about gays a few years ago, the changing of lyrics, the overall conservatism which, if one followed him like i did, always saw glimpses of. He did what he had to do in those days too, MJ did too, Rick James was a comparable talent and he had much more limited success because he was pretty uncompromising in his masculinity and his bawdiness. In the eighties it was easy to overlook the effects that race had on black megastar's careers because they were huge but if you look closely you see the signs that they had to somehow emasculate or minimize their sexuality. Eddie Murphy had to be seen as a non-sexual, non-romantic figure in his biggest hit, Beverly Hills Cop, which was originally meant for stallone and he would have had a romantic interest in the film.

*

I agree. I think it was in Raw that Murphy said, "Michael Jackson took Brook Shields to the Grammys, and y'all all applauded ‘cause y'all thought it was cute. That's ‘cause y'all knew Brooke wasn't gone get fucked later that night. Had Brooke been with me, it wouldn't have been so cute 'cause y'all would have known that Brooke was going to get fucked later that night." So, yes, most African-American artists have known that there is always a line of white racial anxiety that they must navigate. Thus, your point about Murphy not having a love interest in Beverley Hills Cop is excellent. In most cases, the black male actor was the womanless side-kick to the white hero.

*

As for Prince taking it too far in his backlash against his past, I guess it's relative to how each of us perceives it. The changing of the lyrics didn't bother me as much probably because, as a poet and short story writer, myself, I got to a point where I wanted to ensure that any profanity that I used was realistic and not gratuitous. I guess, as you allude to it, I always recognized the undercurrent Judeo-Christian ideology in his early work, with songs such as “Annie Christian” and even with “1999,” so him becoming more orthodox didn't surprise me as much. In fact, I was surprised by those who either didn't see his orthodoxy coming or couldn't fathom the possibility that he would become more orthodox. As for his post-JW statement about gays, while, of course, insensitive, it wasn't the first time he had distanced himself from the LGBT community. In 1981 in either the famed Boskamp or Mitchell interview, his answer to the question, "What's the most misunderstood thing about you?" is "that my real name is Prince and that people think that I'm gay." Of course, in this early interview, he is not, in any way, attacking the LGBT community, but he does seem to go out of his way to make this point. So, overall, it's just been the ebb and flow with Prince as to what aspect of his personality he felt like exploring or highlighting at any given moment. One thing all fans do know. Whatever Prince believed that particular day, he believed it to the fullest…until he decided to believe something else the next day.

PeteSilas said:

lyrical changes didn't bother me at all but they sure bothered a lot of people here. They were an indication that he was changing. Hell, even in his prime, he went on record saying there was nothing wrong with the advisory label, which, was partially a reaction to him by tipper gore. So he's always had a contradiction thing going. And yes, he denied being gay in interviews in those days while he'd rub on andre and dez and make songs like when you were mine which could have easily been interpreted as a song about a threesome. Then the term "jack u off" which even as a teenager sounded gay to me, you don't jack women off. He played with it all, he probably felt embarrassed and definitely felt guilty (not that he really should have).

1725topp said:

*

I agree. I think it was in Raw that Murphy said, "Michael Jackson took Brook Shields to the Grammys, and y'all all applauded ‘cause y'all thought it was cute. That's ‘cause y'all knew Brooke wasn't gone get fucked later that night. Had Brooke been with me, it wouldn't have been so cute 'cause y'all would have known that Brooke was going to get fucked later that night." So, yes, most African-American artists have known that there is always a line of white racial anxiety that they must navigate. Thus, your point about Murphy not having a love interest in Beverley Hills Cop is excellent. In most cases, the black male actor was the womanless side-kick to the white hero.

*

As for Prince taking it too far in his backlash against his past, I guess it's relative to how each of us perceives it. The changing of the lyrics didn't bother me as much probably because, as a poet and short story writer, myself, I got to a point where I wanted to ensure that any profanity that I used was realistic and not gratuitous. I guess, as you allude to it, I always recognized the undercurrent Judeo-Christian ideology in his early work, with songs such as “Annie Christian” and even with “1999,” so him becoming more orthodox didn't surprise me as much. In fact, I was surprised by those who either didn't see his orthodoxy coming or couldn't fathom the possibility that he would become more orthodox. As for his post-JW statement about gays, while, of course, insensitive, it wasn't the first time he had distanced himself from the LGBT community. In 1981 in either the famed Boskamp or Mitchell interview, his answer to the question, "What's the most misunderstood thing about you?" is "that my real name is Prince and that people think that I'm gay." Of course, in this early interview, he is not, in any way, attacking the LGBT community, but he does seem to go out of his way to make this point. So, overall, it's just been the ebb and flow with Prince as to what aspect of his personality he felt like exploring or highlighting at any given moment. One thing all fans do know. Whatever Prince believed that particular day, he believed it to the fullest…until he decided to believe something else the next day.

*

We definitely agree on most things. The one point on which we disagree is with the words "embarrassed" and "guilty." I think that someone can mature/evolve/grow and decide to stop doing certain things for various reasons without feeling "embarrassed" or "guilty" about what one has done in the past. I decided to stop having sex with various women even before I got married. It wasn't that I was suddenly "embarrassed" or felt "guilty" about sleeping with various women; I just became tired of bed hopping, I wanted a deeper relationship, and I was tired of worrying about protection, STDs, unwanted children, and emotional hang-ups. Similarly, when asked why he changed his fashion style, Freddie Mercury stated, "Well, I couldn't dress like a girl forever" or words to that effect. Clearly, Mercury was still gay and not embarrassed about being gay even though he decided to be less flamboyant. Lots of people change for various reasons, and lots of people don't change for various reasons. Knowing what I know now, I can't believe I once slept with so many different women. And, while I'm glad that I never fathered a child by a woman I didn't love (I don't have any children) and that I never had an STD, I'm not embarrassed about my past. In fact, I think it enables me to appreciate more who I am today. As such, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think you are crazy or irrational for thinking that Prince felt "guilty" or "embarrassed" about his past, it just doesn’t seem plausible to me. Based on the songs that he continued to create and the causes he supported, I think he was always seeking for the best way of which he could think to make a positive impact on society. And to that desire, I even think that he understood that his past would enable him to connect with certain folks that others would not be able to help, allowing him to reach/help folks that others couldn't simply because his past allowed him to appear as a more liberal, open, and honest person even if he became a bit more conservative--I'm using that word loosely--as he aged.

we've had some great posters here the last couple pages, these are the kind of posters who make the place worthwhile.

PeteSilas said:

we've had some great posters here the last couple pages, these are the kind of posters who make the place worthwhile.

pete i agree with you and have enjoyed you sharing your view as well. thanks to Fen and 1725 and everyone else for really giving

it a gentlemanly and womanly go. great discussion!! best!!

http://www.apurpledayindecember.com/2017/08/insatiables-my-name-when-it-comes-to-u.html

"Insatiable's My Name When It Comes to U" - Interview with Robin Power Royal

One of the most intriguing aspects of my interview with Royal was her treatment of Prince's gender. "I’ve never been around someone that was so much a boy and a girl like that in a male form," she said. Throughout our discussion, she'd slip into "they/them" pronouns for Prince and correct herself whenever she used "he/him." I didn't coach her on this or bring this up; I could tell it was her organic way of thinking and speaking about Prince.

To my knowledge, no one who knew Prince personally has addressed him this way, at least publicly. This year--and especially at the Purple Reign academic conference--is when I started putting some serious thought into that aspect of Prince's identity. When he changed his name to the "love symbol," a combination of the male and female signs, I don't think the media, his community of fans and the general public were prepared to delve into that analysis.

PeteSilas said:

we've had some great posters here the last couple pages, these are the kind of posters who make the place worthwhile.

*

I also have enjoyed this tread. Thanks for your insightful comments as well as OF4S, Fen, Purplefam99, and others. Now, let’s hope this tread isn’t the equivalent of Dorothy’s bathtub, and, after this, we must return to the violent rooms or threads. :^)

OldFriends4Sale said:

http://www.apurpledayindecember.com/2017/08/insatiables-my-name-when-it-comes-to-u.html

"Insatiable's My Name When It Comes to U" - Interview with Robin Power Royal

One of the most intriguing aspects of my interview with Royal was her treatment of Prince's gender. "I’ve never been around someone that was so much a boy and a girl like that in a male form," she said. Throughout our discussion, she'd slip into "they/them" pronouns for Prince and correct herself whenever she used "he/him." I didn't coach her on this or bring this up; I could tell it was her organic way of thinking and speaking about Prince.

To my knowledge, no one who knew Prince personally has addressed him this way, at least publicly. This year--and especially at the Purple Reign academic conference--is when I started putting some serious thought into that aspect of Prince's identity. When he changed his name to the "love symbol," a combination of the male and female signs, I don't think the media, his community of fans and the general public were prepared to delve into that analysis.

*

I think that folks like you and a few others on this site and Housequake as well have been having this discussion in one way or another for some time now. I even think that, to a degree, Hill addresses this in his book, even though his book ends in 89, McInnis does in his book, and a few other thoughtful articles have addressed this. Of course, they/we may all differ or disagree with our interpretation of the name change to the symbol as well as other aspects of his sexuality, but I think this conversation has been ongoing though not as loudly as other aspects of Prince. Let’s hope that with more academic conferences as well as more scholarly journals publishing special issues on Prince this and many other topics are studied more thoroughly.

OldFriends4Sale said:

http://www.apurpledayindecember.com/2017/08/insatiables-my-name-when-it-comes-to-u.html

"Insatiable's My Name When It Comes to U" - Interview with Robin Power Royal

One of the most intriguing aspects of my interview with Royal was her treatment of Prince's gender. "I’ve never been around someone that was so much a boy and a girl like that in a male form," she said. Throughout our discussion, she'd slip into "they/them" pronouns for Prince and correct herself whenever she used "he/him." I didn't coach her on this or bring this up; I could tell it was her organic way of thinking and speaking about Prince.

To my knowledge, no one who knew Prince personally has addressed him this way, at least publicly. This year--and especially at the Purple Reign academic conference--is when I started putting some serious thought into that aspect of Prince's identity. When he changed his name to the "love symbol," a combination of the male and female signs, I don't think the media, his community of fans and the general public were prepared to delve into that analysis.

At his core, he was deeply female. Because of the era in which he was born, his race and religious background, I don't believe he was ever able to live a completely authentic life. His blood family, the church, the black community and his fans/fams wanted him to be 'their' Prince, they wouldn't let him be his own Prince.

Had he been born 20 years later, I believe he may have been on HRT, lived his true destiny, no one would have cared, his cultural impact would have been far greater and he would have been a happier individual, more tolerant of others, less manic about control....because he would have had the ultimate control: the control to be who he was. And he would have had the balm of being able to love and accept who he really was.

And I think he would have lived to a ripe old age. RIP.

Bodhitheblackdog said:

At his core, he was deeply female. Because of the era in which he was born, his race and religious background, I don't believe he was ever able to live a completely authentic life. His blood family, the church, the black community and his fans/fams wanted him to be 'their' Prince, they wouldn't let him be his own Prince.

Had he been born 20 years later, I believe he may have been on HRT, lived his true destiny, no one would have cared, his cultural impact would have been far greater and he would have been a happier individual, more tolerant of others, less manic about control....because he would have had the ultimate control: the control to be who he was. And he would have had the balm of being able to love and accept who he really was.

And I think he would have lived to a ripe old age. RIP.

Wait....

are you suggesting Prince was Transgender ?

Bodhitheblackdog said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

http://www.apurpledayindecember.com/2017/08/insatiables-my-name-when-it-comes-to-u.html

"Insatiable's My Name When It Comes to U" - Interview with Robin Power Royal

One of the most intriguing aspects of my interview with Royal was her treatment of Prince's gender. "I’ve never been around someone that was so much a boy and a girl like that in a male form," she said. Throughout our discussion, she'd slip into "they/them" pronouns for Prince and correct herself whenever she used "he/him." I didn't coach her on this or bring this up; I could tell it was her organic way of thinking and speaking about Prince.

To my knowledge, no one who knew Prince personally has addressed him this way, at least publicly. This year--and especially at the Purple Reign academic conference--is when I started putting some serious thought into that aspect of Prince's identity. When he changed his name to the "love symbol," a combination of the male and female signs, I don't think the media, his community of fans and the general public were prepared to delve into that analysis.

At his core, he was deeply female. Because of the era in which he was born, his race and religious background, I don't believe he was ever able to live a completely authentic life. His blood family, the church, the black community and his fans/fams wanted him to be 'their' Prince, they wouldn't let him be his own Prince.

Had he been born 20 years later, I believe he may have been on HRT, lived his true destiny, no one would have cared, his cultural impact would have been far greater and he would have been a happier individual, more tolerant of others, less manic about control....because he would have had the ultimate control: the control to be who he was. And he would have had the balm of being able to love and accept who he really was.

And I think he would have lived to a ripe old age. RIP.

What are you on about??

MMJas said:

Bodhitheblackdog said:

At his core, he was deeply female. Because of the era in which he was born, his race and religious background, I don't believe he was ever able to live a completely authentic life. His blood family, the church, the black community and his fans/fams wanted him to be 'their' Prince, they wouldn't let him be his own Prince.

Had he been born 20 years later, I believe he may have been on HRT, lived his true destiny, no one would have cared, his cultural impact would have been far greater and he would have been a happier individual, more tolerant of others, less manic about control....because he would have had the ultimate control: the control to be who he was. And he would have had the balm of being able to love and accept who he really was.

And I think he would have lived to a ripe old age. RIP.

What are you on about??

who knows, we all know about his femininity and there have been many quotes, one in particular, i can't remember by who right now, where they said he gave off lesbian vibes, it wasn't the famous wendy quote where she said he's a "fancy lesbian" it was someone else.

This should be the title of this thread.

Going through old threads...man some Orgers weren't mindless yes fans when it came to Ptince

PeteSilas said:

MMJas said:

What are you on about??

who knows, we all know about his femininity and there have been many quotes, one in particular, i can't remember by who right now, where they said he gave off lesbian vibes, it wasn't the famous wendy quote where she said he's a "fancy lesbian" it was someone else.

I think that was more Lisa, but I do love Wendy's response when she saw him emerge on the set of one of the Dirty Mind videos. She said even she(being lesbionic) thought of having sex with Prince lol

.

I do know what you are talking about though. There are a few women who in various ways said that 'having sex with Prince was like having sex with a woman' and they didn't say that in a bad way.

OldFriends4Sale said:

PeteSilas said:

who knows, we all know about his femininity and there have been many quotes, one in particular, i can't remember by who right now, where they said he gave off lesbian vibes, it wasn't the famous wendy quote where she said he's a "fancy lesbian" it was someone else.

I think that was more Lisa, but I do love Wendy's response when she saw him emerge on the set of one of the Dirty Mind videos. She said even she(being lesbionic) thought of having sex with Prince lol

.

I do know what you are talking about though. There are a few women who in various ways said that 'having sex with Prince was like having sex with a woman' and they didn't say that in a bad way.

That makes sense and is totally different to what I was responding to. I was addressing the comment about Prince being on HRT if he had been born later.