GrayKing said:

Despite the fact that I am a musician who takes pride in composing his own songs, I have to agree here. I found Debbie's music annoying when I first heard it 16 years ago, and it hasn't aged well IMO.

When all is said and done, I suppose comparing crap to crap is a waste of time. Still, for the sake of discussion, I would rather look at and listen to Britney. Regardless of the source of the compositions, I find "I'm A Slave 4 U", "Toxic" and "Sometimes" far more enjoyable than anything Deborah released.

JesseDezz said:

i dont know about that..i would fuck Debbie anytime over Britney thats for sure

i say hit them both with an ax

VoicesCarry said:

I agree. How did her records sound as she got older? I don't notice anyone singing the praises of "MYOB". I heard a little bit of that song when she was on some show and it seemed like she regressed. It was a very immature pop song with a kind of chant. She on some some radio show (probably Howard Stern) bragging that it was something she had never done before. OK. I would like to pick up a well rounded greatest hits of hers, including newer stuff. Probably not possible, nor profitable.

minneapolisgenius said:

orgers are running outta topics

yeah i know, u start any good ones then?


I was just pissed off at the time all the praise Britney gets whilst debbie got none. Thats all.....

thesexofit said:

it will go down as one of the great social issues/movements of this early century when future civilizations look back on our quaint time.

I hope so. But hardly anyone remembers her now. Will the same happen to Britney if u give her 10 years?

It's funny as loads here love early Madonna but hate Debbie gibson. They sound quite the same.....

RipHer2Shreds said:

REALLY?!!!

Starmist7 said:

oh, yes. there's another difference. one has a career, and the other doesn't.

One had talent, one hasn't!

thesexofit said:

considering the genre of music, that's irrelevant.

That is unfair. Beatles did good cheese, Jacko did good cheese, so did Debbie.

GrayKing said:

No it isn't. If you had to make the choice, wouldn't you rather listen to someone who could at the very least sing well even if you hated their material vs. someone who couldn't AND had shitty material?

oh man, don't get me started. i love me some debbie gibson! britney is my girl too though so this is hard but i have to go with debbie. this girl wrote, sang and produced and played piano. she's very talented! only in my dreams is a pop master piece!

Tiffany was caca.

Debbie (now deborah) was more of the real deal..although she debuted after Tiffany and was compared to her as a Tiffany wannabe. The singles proved otherwise. I think Tiffany had someone behind her who really wanted her to succeed. I could be wrong, but Debbie's success stopped Tiffanys from getting bigger. Not sure why she floppod like loafers after album #2 (she had strong hits from it) but I recall the whole teen thing imploding and along with Debbie and Tiffany went NKOTB too.

The final fight for teeny bopper music won when we saw NSYNC, Buttplug Boys and Spicey Grrls, hit the scene. The big difference was that they were going after girls...not boys to purchase and listen to music (I think girls are less fickle when it comes to music and being really devoted to a musical artist). Another change was that these "kids" were close to 18 so that they can identify with a bigger crowd as well as being able to break out and do solo stuff or become adults in front of the world. Teeny bopper music is here to stay.

Brits is caca

GrayKing said:

No but there is more integrity behind it. For some that makes it better.

There is also a HUGE difference between what teens were writing in '86 vs'04.

I'd let my kids listen to Debbie, but I'll need to sex ed them before Brits.

VoicesCarry said:

It did. She's still in the music/actian/broadway biz. She tried a mature album...no one bought though. It wasn't bad either. I don't think she had the proper promotion. Debbie is very talented and didn't need the radio stations to tell her so. She did move onto better things.

thesexofit said:

I have to disagree here. I'm not sure why, but I really never put them in the same league. Debbie's music was geared for kids and teens and Madonnas at the time, was moving away from that...if it was ever really there.

GrayKing said:

Did Britney get dropped from her label? I think Deborah is doing just fine career wise. She just applied her talents elsewhere, like on the stage. Britneys talents will go about as far as the dollar that's promoting her. ANd then she'll do something DRASTIC to get back int he public eye.

Debbie's voice/music always seemed more suited to the theater, where she's at home nowadays.

VoicesCarry said:

sure. but i'd prefer someone who couldn't sing a lick but had great material vs. someone with crap material who wrote it themselves and could sing well. it's like preferring Bob Dylan to Mariah Carey.

in this instance, i prefer Britney to Debbie

GrayKing said:

the better of 2 evils

superspaceboy said:

yeah, Beauty & the Beast, like, 7 years ago. what since then?