herb4 said:

Didn't Prince screen movies he liked at PP like Barbarella, The Matrix and Minority Report or am I getting that confused for when he would rent out movie theaters and take the PP fans there?

Anyways, who really cares what movies they show there? Prince aint gonna complain and no one is forcing anyone to go watch it as far as I know.

Seems like a weird thing to get upset about either way.

In the grand scheme of things and at this particular moment in time, "Paisley Park Screens Film About The Origins of Modern Drag Culture" is pretty low on my list of shit to care about, let alone get outraged.

As others have pointed out, Prince himself challenged gender norms throughout his career, particularly as it relates to fashion. His Love Symbol is famously a combination of male and female signs. He wore heavy makeup, high heels, lace, frills and, for many, was an inspiration to closeted gay people and folks who didn't fit in along gender (or racial) lines.

What I'm saying is, who really gives a fuck?

This post is all kinds of wrongs bud lol

vainandy said:

Vannormal said:

I'm sorry, but dream on tbh.

Purely from a busyness point of view, PP won't last very long if it should only be related to Prince's work and life.

May I remind you that at some point in the late eighties, it was his intention to rent out PP as a recording and filming facility. Also as another chanel of income (maybe). At least that's what happened.

And he did that for a long time too I believe. Correct me if i'm wrong.

Honestly, to me, PP won't survive on Prince tourism alone tbh.

Maybe for the next couple of years, but still - at some point he & PP will be forgotten.

Although i'm no expert in this, I can't see why there would be more (new) Prince fans wanting to come to PP. But maybe that's my (European) point of view on all this...

We all are quite older. I don't feel like going especially to Minneapolis to visit PP even as a big Prince fan that i am.

Probably i'm not the only Prince fan thinking like this (outside fo the US).

But let's hope it still lasts for a very long time, no matter what it will be used for.

There is no disrespect towards Prince to make it profitable in a right way.

If they could make a cinema out of it, why not. As long as it doesn't become a shopping mall. lol

I realize in the future, the appeal of both Paisley Park and Prince fades as his fans die off. They could have more Prince related events and keep it "Prince related only" for probably a decade more if they weren't so slow releasing each unreleased project. People have to be excited enough to attend some sort of event but the longer it takes for each project to be released, the more the excitement fades. Hell, they should be flooding us with material and keeping the excitement constant. I don't know why they are sitting on things and taking so long because we're not getting any younger and when we're dead, the younger generation doesn't give a hill of beans about Prince. In our lifetimes though, they should be "Princing" it up, big time. Once we're gone though, I don't care what they do.

[Edited 12/13/21 8:51am]

Best thing that can happen to PP in 20 years from now is that it will be torn down, so maybe sort of concert hall for commercial use might be build/ For concerts or whatever use.

The place is simply too big to maintain.

It couldbe caarying his name, if anyone will still remember him by then.

The Prince Hall, or The Prince Dome, or The Purple Rain Hall...

Whatever...

herb4 said:

JorisE73 said:

but isn't it just an act? That he pretends to be a crazed outlandish 'Righty' so his lefty/lib peers can say how outlandish all people on the right are and provide 'evidence'?

I think a lot of this shit started out that way. You know, like how Limbaugh, Coulter and FOX sort of found their niche by generating "outrage" dollars thru saying provocative things, similar to Howard Stern and guys like that, but most of them didn't really believe it. It just made them money.

Problem is, their listeners DO believe it and now we have generations of people raised on this crap who essentially think that being an edgelord, rude, mean asshole means you're "telling it like it is". I mean, that's all "political correctness" ever really was or is: "try not to be a dick."

I don't know why that's controversial or a bad thing to strive for just because occasionally you might think that someone is being overly sensitive about something.

What I mean is, it started out as an act but now it's a belief system.

It sucks.

Fully agree.

Another thing to add, right or conservatism has always there. That's not so much it imo.

It started to find it's equals and ways to creates false truths through the (use) of the internet.

I think a lot changed since the internet came available to 'everyone' without any warning, rules or control. It was promotoed as THE thing for the future for 'all of us' and that it would 'connect the world'. Well, did that turned out different tbh!

When Media became 'social' and 'uncontroled', think about al this.

That's when the sleeping dogs from hell were unleashed in the most easiest and free way.

And that is today's result from 'social media' as we know it.

LTake this, just create a group that believes that birds don't excist and are spying upon us (like drones), to kill us all or some nonsens like that.

Then there's some smartass who creates a wesite, and before night falls he has like half a million suckers who support him without any checks and balances.

They can easily find proof and so called (uncheckable) facts everywhere on the same uncontrolable internet.

And the more you go against them, try to proof them wrong, the more they grow in existence.

That's the sickness of today's use of the so called smart internet.

Mind that the internet in a general contemporary time frame, is still very young. What, 25 ? 30 years old maybe?

Rules made too late by any government is always behind the overgrown problem, thus difficult to control, cause money is in the picture. Big money.

Big money sells us all useless sad quality shit, produced by low cost Eastern countries, made in uhuman conditions we all don't give a shit about.

There ya go.

An interesting example;

on the same level of thinking, I heard a british young man say the following to the question asked ''what is it being British?'' and he replied;

''Being British is all about driving a German car, get pissed in an Iris pub where they drik Belgian Beer, eating an Indian take away at home, and sit on a swedish sofa, watch American shows on a Korean/Japanese televison, order the cheapest shit online, and all the while being suspicious and intollerant."

Something to think about.

-

Yes I do believe that showing documentareis (it is not a movie) like 'Paris is Burning' and other time related topics with these kind of themes are very relevant.

It might help PP to get some attention and money too.

Whatever PP is up to, Prince isn't here anymore.

I hope they can keep the house open for a long time just the way they want it.

Sure there will aways be critique from any side for whatever choice they make.

[Edited 12/15/21 8:01am]

OldFriends4Sale said:

herb4 said:

Didn't Prince screen movies he liked at PP like Barbarella, The Matrix and Minority Report or am I getting that confused for when he would rent out movie theaters and take the PP fans there?

Anyways, who really cares what movies they show there? Prince aint gonna complain and no one is forcing anyone to go watch it as far as I know.

Seems like a weird thing to get upset about either way.

In the grand scheme of things and at this particular moment in time, "Paisley Park Screens Film About The Origins of Modern Drag Culture" is pretty low on my list of shit to care about, let alone get outraged.

As others have pointed out, Prince himself challenged gender norms throughout his career, particularly as it relates to fashion. His Love Symbol is famously a combination of male and female signs. He wore heavy makeup, high heels, lace, frills and, for many, was an inspiration to closeted gay people and folks who didn't fit in along gender (or racial) lines.

What I'm saying is, who really gives a fuck?

This post is all kinds of wrongs bud lol

Can you elaborate beyond "nuh-uh, you're wrong"?

"bud"

I really don't see why people have a problem with drag. Our planet is dying, animals are persecuted and mutilated daily, and all people complain about is boys in frocks.

Get educated!

Boys have been dressing as girls for thousands of years.

Woman were not allowed to be educated, they could not read and they certainly could not perform on stage. So boys/men played the female parts - it's as simple as that.

William Shakespeare (whom sadly I expect most people haven't heard of) used to write in the notes of his plays, DRAG, meaning, 'Dressed As Girl'.

Surely anyone who can read, or has at least studied Shakespear, will know this.

Ignorance is never an excuse.

[Edited 12/15/21 8:22am]

darkroman said:

I really don't see why people have a problem with drag. Our planet is dying, animals are persecuted and mutilated daily, and all people complain about is boys in frocks.

Get educated!

Boys have been dressing as girls for thousands of years.

Woman were not allowed to be educated, they could not read and they certainly could not perform on stage. So boys/men played the female parts - it's as simple as that.

William Shakespeare (whom sadly I expect most people haven't heard of) used to write in the notes of his plays, DRAG, meaning, 'Dressed As Girl'.

Surely anyone who can read, or has at least studied Shakespear, will know this.

Ignorance is never an excuse.

[Edited 12/15/21 8:22am]

Agreed.

And "gender appropriate dress" has evolved and change so much over time that, to me, it barely registers as something I should be upset about on any level whatsoever. I'm old enough to remember my elders getting their knickers in a twist over boys having long hair or earrings.

You make perfect sense to me but I guess we'll wait for OF4S to tell us why our posts are "all sorts of wrong". Hopefully with some detailed explanations as to why.

I suppose I messed up the "movie screening" part of my post but even that I framed as a question since I wasn't sure.

herb4 said:

It's weird to me that a conversation about gender bending could become controversial on a PRINCE board of all places

I mean...uhhh














Just sayin

No other man loved make up more than Prince... maybe Little richard too, but he only went for the eyeliner

Prince wore heels for fucks sake, how feminine is that.

I love everything about Pirnce's travestry. Though he was a real macho man.

Vannormal said:

No other man loved make up more than Prince... maybe Little richard too, but he only went for the eyeliner

Prince wore heels for fucks sake, how feminine is that.

I love everything about Pirnce's travestry. Though he was a real macho man.

I think it's more that people (mostly men) are afraid of other men who try to "act like" women (in the most hilarious and over-the-top in a entertaining way) and not about there clothing style.
I don't think most men care how people dress but that it's more about how people act out of there perceived generic and socially accepted way that scares them.

herb4 said:

It's weird to me that a conversation about gender bending could become controversial on a PRINCE board of all places

I mean...uhhh





Just sayin

Those pix are amazing and so funny LOL.

(I've removed some so that we don't have a really long thread).

I've forgotten how camp and feminine Prince could be.

The picture on the Lovesexy tour programme looks like an audition for Rupaul's Drag Race!

He'd need to up his game by quite a bit if he was to win as those queens are fierce.

I really do think that if anyone still has issues with Paris Is Burning, drag and blurred gender lines, they may as well give up now as that game is well and truly lost.

Prince has been a drag queen for most of his career. LOL.

darkroman said:

Prince has been a drag queen for most of his career. LOL.

yeah well except he wasn't. He wasn;t wearing dresses or overtly 'female' clothing, I would rather say he wore genderless clothing.

JorisE73 said:

Vannormal said:

No other man loved make up more than Prince... maybe Little richard too, but he only went for the eyeliner

Prince wore heels for fucks sake, how feminine is that.

I love everything about Pirnce's travestry. Though he was a real macho man.

I think it's more that people (mostly men) are afraid of other men who try to "act like" women (in the most hilarious and over-the-top in a entertaining way) and not about there clothing style.
I don't think most men care how people dress but that it's more about how people act out of there perceived generic and socially accepted way that scares them.

Honestly, no matter how masculine Prince was, even with that sway walk which was nearly like prancing.... You can't deny that most of his dancing moves were everything but macho.

Even his fake fuck moves over a micro stand on the floor wans't all that masuline.

And I know it was stage performance/acting, and it was so super damn good too. I absolutely love every second of it.

-

Though, compare that with Bruce Springsteens moves and dances.

That guy was as energetic in 1979 (30yo) as Prince was in 1984. Quite different.

Actually it's not fair to compare these two here. But i wanted to explain a difference in macho moves, besides the femine clothing style that Prince was very much into for a long time.

-

See Bruce go wild here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2umNcwnjg8

-

Oh and I fully agree with your last sentence.

Most men are learned from a young age on to be macho, tough, so they can thrive with that competitive behaviour, including all its acts and moves. Maybe that's what makes them so scared from all other different behaving (hetero) men who might be a bit different even.

[Edited 12/16/21 7:48am]

I used to wear a lot of stuff that was considered "feminine" or "girly" back in my late teens/art school days. Caught my fair share of shit for it too. "Women's" clothing was just so much more interesting and varied. Traditional "Men's" fashion was (and is) kinda boring.

I mean a normal man's suit hasn't evolved much in over a century.

actually is any of that actually 'gender bending' Is that stuff women wear?
For example a lot of the 1981-1988 stuff Prince wore was historic clothing. Buccanneers Parates italian Harlequin and Pierrot(entertaining clowns) the Regency era and Victorian era, Gangers/Mafia and Pimps

.

from the buttons on the side of the pants the ruffled shirts and various trench coats, the use of make up

.

This was stuff males wore, not female

.

The dirty mind era pick was his New Wave meets Thrift until I start bring in that money

herb4 said:

It's weird to me that a conversation about gender bending could become controversial on a PRINCE board of all places

I mean...uhhh














Just sayin

OldFriends4Sale said:

actually is any of that actually 'gender bending' Is that stuff women wear?
For example a lot of the 1981-1988 stuff Prince wore was historic clothing. Buccanneers Parates italian Harlequin and Pierrot(entertaining clowns) the Regency era and Victorian era, Gangers/Mafia and Pimps

.

from the buttons on the side of the pants the ruffled shirts and various trench coats, the use of make up

.

This was stuff males wore, not female

.

The dirty mind era pick was his New Wave meets Thrift until I start bring in that money

If you honestly think Prince was going for "historical male look" and not "hyper-feminine/androgynous", you're thinking waaaay too hard. Seriously, you don't need to try and recontextualize the dude's fashion to prove a point about some movie you don't like being shown at Paisley Park...

bozojones said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

actually is any of that actually 'gender bending' Is that stuff women wear?
For example a lot of the 1981-1988 stuff Prince wore was historic clothing. Buccanneers Parates italian Harlequin and Pierrot(entertaining clowns) the Regency era and Victorian era, Gangers/Mafia and Pimps

.

from the buttons on the side of the pants the ruffled shirts and various trench coats, the use of make up

.

This was stuff males wore, not female

.

The dirty mind era pick was his New Wave meets Thrift until I start bring in that money

If you honestly think Prince was going for "historical male look" and not "hyper-feminine/androgynous", you're thinking waaaay too hard. Seriously, you don't need to try and recontextualize the dude's fashion to prove a point about some movie you don't like being shown at Paisley Park...

Or maybe people are thinking to lite? Prince was a very thoughtful man. Let's not disrespect his legacy. Take a dip into the deep end

.

That Prince didn't put thought into the style as he did his music, which often went hand in hand.
.
We did a thread about this about a year ago, where we posted a lot of the info from Prince and the designers

ie that Gold era outfit is directly from italian Venetian masquerade masks

.

This part has nothing to do with PIS, I already proved my point on that. It's Prince's house.

Also, it's been pointed out repeatedly that gender appropriate clothes/fashion change and evolve over time - in the context of "who cares about a movie celebrating drag culture?" - and Prince was a HUGE part of that, as it relates to the thread topic.

Whether it's masculine or feminine doesn't matter to me and it never did but I can assure everyone here that in the early 1980's it mattered to a lot of people, for equally misguided and petty reasons that were almost entirely centered around homophobia. I always thought the gender bending shit that Prince, Bowie, Mark Bolan, Mick Jagger, Boy George, Annie Lennox, Adam Ant, Elton John, Grace Jones, New York Dolls, etc. were cool as hell and stll do. I appreciated their bravery and how they challenged uptight people who can never seem to get over themselves or put down the pearls they like to clutch.

I keep thinking and hoping that we've moved past that and, while we've come a long way, we're obviously not there yet if some of the posts in this thread are any sort of barometer. The OP's thesis here is that Prince would HATE a critically acclaimed movie celebrating drag culture being shown at PP - and maybe he would. May be.

But he aint around to complain about it anymore and none of us should speak for him.

bozojones said:

herb4 said:

Can you elaborate beyond "nuh-uh, you're wrong"?

"bud"

Of course they can't, because their reason is "I don't like it and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong"

are you bozojones or mbdtyler today?

herb4 said:

Also, it's been pointed out repeatedly that gender appropriate clothes/fashion change and evolve over time - in the context of "who cares about a movie celebrating drag culture?" - and Prince was a HUGE part of that, as it relates to the thread topic.

Whether it's masculine or feminine doesn't matter to me and it never did but I can assure everyone here that in the early 1980's it mattered to a lot of people, for equally misguided and petty reasons that were almost entirely centered around homophobia. I always thought the gender bending shit that Prince, Bowie, Mark Bolan, Mick Jagger, Boy George, Annie Lennox, Adam Ant, Elton John, Grace Jones, New York Dolls, etc. were cool as hell and stll do. I appreciated their bravery and how they challenged uptight people who can never seem to get over themselves or put down the pearls they like to clutch.

I keep thinking and hoping that we've moved past that and, while we've come a long way, we're obviously not there yet if some of the posts in this thread are any sort of barometer. The OP's thesis here is that Prince would HATE a critically acclaimed movie celebrating drag culture being shown at PP - and maybe he would. May be.

But he aint around to complain about it anymore and none of us should speak for him.

We only go by what we know, and PP wasn't going to be waving the lgbt flag... and my real premise is if this is a Fuck you to Prince's beliefs as bozojones/mbdtyler stated then it's a disrespect to Prince and his legacy

Paisley Park is PRINCES' place...

DotsofU said:

I actually love that it is a little bit of a F*ck You to him after gay people supported and more importantly = stuck by him even in the lean years...

mbdtyler said:

I see it less as a "FUCK YOU" to Prince altogether and more of a "FUCK YOU" to his narrow-minded homophobic leanings, and I see no issue with Paisley Park being an openly inclusive place to modern day people. Leave that bigotry bullshit in the past where it belongs.

it's like arguing with a brick wall

bozojones said:

it's like arguing with a brick wall

so let it go

are you bozojones or mbdtyler today?

OldFriends4Sale said:

herb4 said:

Also, it's been pointed out repeatedly that gender appropriate clothes/fashion change and evolve over time - in the context of "who cares about a movie celebrating drag culture?" - and Prince was a HUGE part of that, as it relates to the thread topic.

Whether it's masculine or feminine doesn't matter to me and it never did but I can assure everyone here that in the early 1980's it mattered to a lot of people, for equally misguided and petty reasons that were almost entirely centered around homophobia. I always thought the gender bending shit that Prince, Bowie, Mark Bolan, Mick Jagger, Boy George, Annie Lennox, Adam Ant, Elton John, Grace Jones, New York Dolls, etc. were cool as hell and stll do. I appreciated their bravery and how they challenged uptight people who can never seem to get over themselves or put down the pearls they like to clutch.

I keep thinking and hoping that we've moved past that and, while we've come a long way, we're obviously not there yet if some of the posts in this thread are any sort of barometer. The OP's thesis here is that Prince would HATE a critically acclaimed movie celebrating drag culture being shown at PP - and maybe he would. May be.

But he aint around to complain about it anymore and none of us should speak for him.

We only go by what we know, and PP wasn't going to be waving the lgbt flag... and my real premise is if this is a Fuck you to Prince's beliefs as bozojones/mbdtyler stated then it's a disrespect to Prince and his legacy

Well, let me take a page out of your book, try out your posting style and ignore anything of substance that anyone posts as I refuse to engage in good faith with anyone. See how it fits. Or what it adds to a conversation.

Ahem...

*clears throat*

*adjusts mic*

*check, check, 1,2,1,2...*

This post is all sorts of wrong, bud.

Nah. I don't like it.

herb4 said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

We only go by what we know, and PP wasn't going to be waving the lgbt flag... and my real premise is if this is a Fuck you to Prince's beliefs as bozojones/mbdtyler stated then it's a disrespect to Prince and his legacy

Well, let me take a page out of your book, try out your posting style and ignore anything of substance that anyone posts as I refuse to engage in good faith with anyone. See how it fits. Or what it adds to a conversation.

Ahem...

*clears throat*

*adjusts mic*

*check, check, 1,2,1,2...*

This post is all sorts of wrong, bud.

Nah. I don't like it.

nothing out of my book, I've spoken with you before in detail about other things

.

my ideas and beliefs and what I will watch has nothing to do with Prince and Paisley Park and his intentions for Paisley Park. I suspect Minneapolis has other theaters for films

.

It's still Prince's house Paisley Park

bozojones said:

it's like arguing with a brick wall

Nah, brick walls have substance, are solid and are usually built on a strong foundation

herb4 said:

bozojones said:

it's like arguing with a brick wall

Nah, brick walls have substance, are solid and are usually built on a strong foundation

ok so now we are going from debating ideas to disrespecting people

nice

Paisley Park ... is Prince's house

.

If a gay man owned a popular Gay spot, after 50yrs of this spot existing, he died, and then a JW Church wanted to buy it and movie in....

OldFriends4Sale said:

herb4 said:

Well, let me take a page out of your book, try out your posting style and ignore anything of substance that anyone posts as I refuse to engage in good faith with anyone. See how it fits. Or what it adds to a conversation.

Ahem...

*clears throat*

*adjusts mic*

*check, check, 1,2,1,2...*

This post is all sorts of wrong, bud.

Nah. I don't like it.

nothing out of my book, I've spoken with you before in detail about other things

.

my ideas and beliefs and what I will watch has nothing to do with Prince and Paisley Park and his intentions for Paisley Park. I suspect Minneapolis has other theaters for films

.

It's still Prince's house Paisley Park

by "out of your book", I meant "directly quoting something you wrote in this very thread"

So, yeah, "your book". This thread = that book. Page 4 I think. Maybe 5. Granted, it's a short book but a direct quote. I think that meets the criteria.

Author: Prince.org Forums Moderator, OldFriends4Sale

If you don't want pushback, counter opinions or getting called out then gas the thread. You're a mod.

I don't think anyone is being mean or rude to you

EDIT:

I did not mean to say that OF4S started the thread and made a mistake there

Still, a contributing author.

[Edited 12/16/21 12:00pm]

herb4 said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

nothing out of my book, I've spoken with you before in detail about other things

.

my ideas and beliefs and what I will watch has nothing to do with Prince and Paisley Park and his intentions for Paisley Park. I suspect Minneapolis has other theaters for films

.

It's still Prince's house Paisley Park

by "out of your book", I meant "directly quoting something you wrote in this very thread"

So, yeah, "your book". This thread = that book. Page 4 I think. Maybe 5. Granted, it's a short book but a direct quote. I think that meets the criteria.

Author: Prince.org Forums Moderator, OldFriends4Sale

I didn't create the thread, not my book

you are getting personal sir, I have not been personal with you

OldFriends4Sale said:

herb4 said:

by "out of your book", I meant "directly quoting something you wrote in this very thread"

So, yeah, "your book". This thread = that book. Page 4 I think. Maybe 5. Granted, it's a short book but a direct quote. I think that meets the criteria.

Author: Prince.org Forums Moderator, OldFriends4Sale

I didn't create the thread, not my book

you are getting personal sir, I have not been personal with you

how am I getting personal?

My mistake about you starting the thread. I accidentally scrolled to the top of this page and saw your post instead of refreshign page 1. I apologize for that.

But all I did was quote you.

[Edited 12/16/21 11:58am]

herb4 said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

I didn't create the thread, not my book

you are getting personal sir, I have not been personal with you

how am I getting personal?

My mistake about you starting the thread. I accidentally scrolled to the top of this page and saw your post instead of refreshign page 1. I apologize for that.

But all I did was quote you.

[Edited 12/16/21 11:58am]

#144