Not so much Freudian for me, more personal observation of behaviour on SDF.
It was the last sentence of 144man's post which clinched the lone voice as being male, for me.....
Printable View
Not so much Freudian for me, more personal observation of behaviour on SDF.
It was the last sentence of 144man's post which clinched the lone voice as being male, for me.....
Perhaps you are correct... You have seen much more on these boards than I have, so you have a larger sample from which to draw your conclusions. Perhaps the author will someday enlighten us...
Yes, maybe he will.
I hope you didn't have to work today, Good Friday - ?
I had to work today... Fortunately, it was uneventful. Unfortunately, my company is not one that considers religious obserances as important as the bottom line.
As we work for ourselves, we simply closed our showroom.
I prefer not to shop for food on Good Friday, so completed our needs yesterday evening.
Had an enjoyable walk around a garden centre today. While there, sat in the sunshine enjoying a cup of coffee, and then bought some plants.
The thought crossed my mind : 'Double standard'.....:confused:
What led to the thought?
Do I find the idea of walking around a supermarket, and buying requirements on a Good Friday, to be acceptable? : No.
Do I find the idea of walking around a garden centre, and buying requirements on a Good Friday, to be acceptable? : Yes.
That does sound like a double standard I have imposed on myself.....
Do I find the idea of walking around a supermarket, and buying requirements on a Good Friday to be acceptable? Yes.
Do I find the idea of having to work at a supermarket selling requirements on a Good Friday to be acceptable? Absolutely not.
Now that's a double standard.
Well, there you are.
We all have them.
Maybe double standards are far more interesting than single standards.....
Get out of here....and take care you don't over-balance, walking down that thin line in the middle of the road :D
The reader has to be left with some work to do.
There was absolutely no work I needed to do on that particular post... LOL
So, in the movie version we can expect RuPaul to play the heretic? Changes the view of society in the distant future, doesn't it?
We wouldn't know which way to turn, would we....
And you had Mary W. in mind for that role, didn't you....? :)
Not at all. Being stoned would definitely mess up her hair and makeup and he contract would have riders preventing any such foolishness.
No acting required, then.....
Not at all. She'd love to be the crack in the foundation of the Church of the Supreme Goddess Diana. But not if it made her look bad on camera.
I've never been totally 'for' any of the artists, over someone else - as they all have something that I like, and no-one has absolutely everything.
I appreciate both Diana and Mary just about equally now, for different reasons.
It will be interesting to see how Mary does in the new film.....
I'm sure she'll give herself two thumbs up. It'd be four if she could just chop Diana's thumbs off...
I think you're being humorous, but it's also interesting, as I seem to see it a little differently.
Mary's career in showbiz has not had the highs that Diana has experienced, but she is a seasoned performer, and somewhat of a late bloomer. In the earlier years, she didn't have the overt confidence, the vision, and the consistency to make hers an exceptional career much earlier in her life, except as part of a very famous group. That is true of almost all of us, in all walks of life.
I think Mary watches Diana as an 'older sister' figure, and has learned a lot, most significantly from her own efforts.
I always felt that, of all the wonderful female talent at Motown, Diana's strongest competitor within the company was standing right next to her on stage. Diana knew it, but Mary didn't.
That doesn't justify rewriting history, and it's always too late for many things for all of us....but that's just the road we took, to reach where we find ourselves today.
I think Mary knew. When Diana was singing songs that Mary could sing better, it probably meant less to her before the Affair. Then, things probably cleared themselves up in her [[and Flo's) mind that any shared dreams they had as schoolgirls were going to be altered. We all have a sense of fairness and to feel betrayed by a loved one is a tough pill to swallow.
With that being said, I often wonder if artists who have grievances to air in their latter years should not ask themselves a simple question: Knowing what you know now, would you do it again? From Little Richard to James Brown to Mary Wilson to Marvin Gaye and George Clinton and many others, the harshest game in town has proven time and again to be the music industry. Lessons are learned by losing millions and finding out that jealousy is where you least expect to find it.
Would you honestly prefer to live the life you were going to live in hindsight? Little Richard unknown and boxed in as he preached, never expressing himself with unprecedented freedom to the world? George Clinton, a barber? Mary Wilson, [[perhaps) a housewife in Detoit? There is a price to pay for your ticket. Typically, those who complain [[rightly) about being robbed and stabbed in the back still have had experiences that they never dreamed they'd have before being discovered. There is a price to pay for education and as often as not, that price is paid in tears.
Yes, it's a story which applies to all of us but, in show business, it is just played to a much wider audience than the rest of us have.
In any human activity, there will be somebody who will get ahead, and then stays there.
Somebody else, who is following the same course, then feels they have been beaten, and unfairly. Easy to understand why they could begin to feel that way. Not so easy to understand why they settle just for thinking that way, long past the point when it is justifed.
Of the two survivors, all the time Mary needed Diana, looking to her for a lead, while feeling maybe she could do it too, in her way, but just not quite sure how. In turn, Diana was looking away to somebody else, to give her a lead too, simply because she had to....
Nothing complicated about it, I suppose. Just hard on someone when they need and want to hold on to what they know and value, but are struggling to pay the bills. When there is money in our bank account, we can all afford to feel magnanimous about others and the past.
Perspective is funny. Sometimes people have been set up to succeed and blow their opportunity, thinking that by having a hit record today, that the hits and money will keep coming. When they blow yesterday's earnings and have nothing left, they look to a friend or relative who handled the same money and opportunity a little more wisely and expect to receive help from them.
I didn't help you spend your money, so it's curious as to how I'm "turning my back on you" by not letting you waste mine as well. We will never know the full truth of someone else's life, but I suspect that neither lady was a saint or villain, except in the eyes of the other. You only have one chance to live your life, so it's best to do it right the first time. [[I meant to write it that way, BTW. Dramatic license...) :rolleyes:
That's right, neither was a saint or a villain. Just coping with her own situation, and her own feelings, best way she knew how, yet appearing to the world as being, for many years, in identical circumstances to the other.
"She owes me! She would be nothing without my help."
"She's trying to take what I earned!"
Funny thing is, if you flipped either into the other's role in their drama, the story would be the same. I suspect that the SDF disciples of Mary would be Diana fans just as Diana's fans would love Mary rather than Diana had it been "Mary Wilson and the Supremes".
Yes, because it's all in their own minds. So much easier to give attention to Diana, Mary etc, rather than themselves, and make a correction in perception. It would give their lives the interest it lacks.
On the subject of circumstances, how did you find yourself at SDF?
*** TMI Alert [[Be careful of asking a wordy person a question like that!) ***
One of my favorite bands in the late '70s and early '80s was GQ. I Googled the lead singer, Emanuel Raheim LeBlanc a couple of years ago to see what happened since I stopped following the band [[the information superhighway is the greatest thing going!!!!!!!!) and one of the sites that popped up was to a 10 year old discussion about him on the Soulful Detroit forum. That made me curious as to who was discussing music that I liked and lo and behold, I landed here. I joined the first day that I discovered it.
Before the days of the information superhighway, you'd have had to be sat down next to someone knowledgeable, to learn anything of any interest......
I was following what was happening [['lurking') on SDF for some years, following the demise of the Motown Bulletin Board.
I registered when the website was upgraded in August 2010, [[as everybody seemed to be starting afresh) and made my first post some time after that.
I can see that you followed onto SDF exactly 18 months later.
I only belong to a few other forums and I only frequent one other on any sort of a regular basis. This is the only site that tends to relax me when I visit. Especially at work. Good Lord knows that sometimes I need to take a 15 minute vacation and that's pretty much what this site does to my normal working day.
Speaking of the web, I'm of the opinion that having so much information has made us all dumber than we'd otherwise be. I used to purchase pre-season [[American) football and basketball yearbooks. After reading about my two favorite teams, I got the value of my $2.75 investment by learning about all of the other teams. Now, I can sit down and waste an entire day reading about my favorite teams, so I know very little about the teams I don't follow.
I have a much better knowledge base of the things that interest me at the expense of my general knowledge. I honestly think that the internet has made us dumb by allowing us to be smarter.
If you mean that the internet has made us all more aware, but without being more knowledgeable, then I'm inclined to agree,
My awareness is wider, and the potential for furthering that seems endless, but my knowledge is not necessarily any deeper.
I'm just saying that after five minutes of sports, you have the rest of the news broadcast to watch on television and that's how you generally learn the rest of the news. As if you can pick out 12 stories in a world with 6+ billion people... But now that we can determine "the news" ourselves, I believe most people gravitate toward the things that interest them instead of the things that they probably should otherwise know. That's why you have fringe groups popping up everywhere. The conservatives are preaching to the choir, as are the progressives, the nationalists, the xenophobes, and the radical fundamentalists. Nobody needs another point of view because their point of view is the right one and they have thousands of "friends" willing to support that view.
The world has never been more wide open or closed off than it is and it will get worse before it improves. I love the internet, but it is both a wonderful and a dangerous thing. What's a better way to either look to the sky or hide your head in the sand? Let's be honest, if we don't know it in 2014, it's either because the government is hiding it or because we just don't really want to know about it.
Given the chance to avoid anything which doesn't seem to directly involve them, I believe most people will avoid it.
Just as if given the taste of medicine, most won't take it. It's just human nature. And I lump myself in with those that I criticize. I don't want to know how many dark things have to happen to keep the light on in my world just as I don't want to know what happens to the parts of the cow that get thrown away, so long as I can eat my steak. Figuratively speaking, of course.
I come from farming stock and the country, and was close to the production of meat and food when young, so I'm perhaps more aware than many about it all.
I learned that livestock [[and pets) have a right to be treated with dignity and respect [[e.g. feeding them before I feed myself), and i enjoyed learning about the different terms used to describe them during their lives.
Children should be taught all about the lives of the domestic animals which produce their food, and also the production of arable crops - but I abhor the way livestock is now often described as being 'a boy' or 'a girl'.:mad:
I hate the way gender is used as a substitute for sex. [Inverted commas omitted for comedic effect]
Always best to laugh, as and when we can, on issues which annoy, if not even more.
I do feel a little guilty if I suspect I'm taking it all a bit seriously but, very often,.......:rolleyes:
It's sad that we can no longer laugh with each other over those issues for fear of being considered "insensitive". Black people have to be worried over comic roles in films with predominately white casts for fear of being considered buffoonish. White people can't tell the same jokes about black people for fear of being considered racist. One of my favorite films was "Blazing Saddles" and it was patently offensive to EVERYBODY but you never thought they were laughing AT anyone because we were all in on the joke. Send that script to a studio in 2014 and you'll never work in films again.
Part of the blame does go toward people who don't include others. Making Asian and Indian characters into caricatures because the writers were too lazy to involve people of those heritages in the production doesn't help. We all want to laugh, but we can all find something to laugh at together without stepping on the dignity of others.
I sometimes wonder if that was the greatest appeal of Disney animation...
That's probably why fantasy is one of my favorite genres. Too much of the real world exists in the real world to be comfortable while being entertained.