Europride and Gaga in Rome

Discuss

42 Responses to “Europride and Gaga in Rome”

  1. mojo says:

    Catholicism is drifting further and further behind the moral standards of Europe. The immoral behaviour of Catholics is no longer being tolerated, be it discrimination or hatred.

    Because the EU Human Rights charter bans things like discrimination on the grounds of gender or sexual orientation the Catholic Church is effectively locked out and unable to provide the services it traditionally used to exert influence. As an example a Catholic adoption facilitator was dismissed for refusing to consider same sex couples, and the decision was backed up by the courts.

    We are now enjoying the emergence of truly moral societies and laws, no longer held back by religious dogma. Until you free yourself from a god handing down moral commandments from on high you can’t be a truly moral person because the assumption is always that God is right.

    • Teller says:

      “Until you free yourself from a god handing down moral commandments from on high you can’t be a truly moral person…”

      See how irresistible commandments are?

  2. Dorkomatic says:

    But surely, both the Pope and L.Gaga are FICTIONAL characters. (Aren’t they?)

  3. Anonymous says:

    My opinion has long been that the state should stop marrying people altogether. Straight and gay alike can get civil union recognition from the state, with all the rights and freedoms that go along with it… and if they want a marriage ceremony (religious or otherwise) they are free to have one. It will just be completely irrelevant to governmental process. Is this not an obvious solution? Fix the law, keep it equal, AND preserve the sanctity of marriage in one fell swoop.

  4. Tommy Angelo says:

    There are so many mistakes in this article that I should debunk it, rather than criticize it.

    I would like to point out the fact that the canonic law never ever became the law of the Kingdom and later Republic of Italy. In 1929 the so called “Concordato” (agreement) between the Kingdom and the Catholic church granted some special “benefits” to the Church and some other things, for example a catholic wedding can be at the same time a civil wedding (basically you do both together in the same ceremony, which kind of makes sense and saves a lot of time).

    But the two are still formally and legally separated and one can choose whether they want to have both or just one of them.

    Don’t get me wrong: personally I am an atheist and I despise the lovely relationship between Italy and the Catholic Church, but Ms TeÅ¡anović has the tendency to describe my country in a rather grotesque and over-simplifying way, which is of course wrong.

    What would you think if I wrote in this blog that Americans are a bunch of cowboys who spend their days shooting at people for the sake of shooting at people?

    And btw: Rome is not the capital of Vatican, just of Italy. The Vatican is a sovereign State and it has its own capital, Vatican City.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      What would you think if I wrote in this blog that Americans are a bunch of cowboys who spend their days shooting at people for the sake of shooting at people?

      I’d say, “Fuckin A, Bubba!”

      • Tommy Angelo says:

        Alright, so what Antinous is saying is that…

      • Jake0748 says:

        Alright, so what Antinous is saying is that… “Americans ARE a bunch of cowboys who spend their days shooting at people for the sake of shooting at people”.

        And dang proud of it, bub. ;)

    • Jasmina TeÅ¡anovic says:

      @ Tommy Angelo
      Please debunk my texts, I find your criticism in bad faith and substantially wrong. I stand behind my words: I live in Italy while you live in denial!

      • Tommy Angelo says:

        @Jasmina: sorry, but I don’t start infinite discussions on the internet anymore :-) It is just bad for the mood.

        Of course you can stand before your words, but that does not mean those words refer to actual facts. The canonic law never became the civil law.

        The politician you describe as an homosexual forced to leave because of his sexual habits, in reality was a married catholic man who spent thousand of euros in cocaine and prostitutes (regardless of their gender) and that money was public money, not his own. That’s why he resigned when he got caught!

        You refer to the last referendum as a fight against Berlusconi. That’s plainly wrong, because of the very nature of the referendum in Italy. It is a technical matter: with this referendum nothing will change in the Italian politics, because the refendum is designed exactely not to be used as a political instrument, but just to abrogate a specific law or part of a law, which has then to be replaced by a new law voted by the Parliament.

        But you, like all the e-activists, don’t even know how a referendum works, but you tell me I am in denial. You, like all the leftist in Italy, believe that we live in a regime, because the left wing coalition did not have the majority for some time.

        When the left parties lose, they say there is a dictatorship; when they win, there is democracy. And the same goes for the right wing parties, of course.

        Every generation has its political villain. Today is Berlusconi, yesterday someone else (Andreotti, Cossiga, Craxi and so on). It’s an old story, everyone needs a Goldstein and everyone needs a couple of minutes of hate every day.

        • Jasmina TeÅ¡anovic says:

          @Angelo, you ARE starting endless discussions and you are NOT sorry!

          Your new comment is quite clear: you call me an italian leftist and like all e-activists allegedly I do this and that…

          your interpretation of reality and facts is that of a, let’ s say maggioranza silenziosa positivist, an etiquette for you in return , and i really don’t have time to explain how canonic law was part of civil law in italy ( i studied law in Milan btw) and why the present referendum is perceived against Berlusconi too or why i think the gay catholic politican resigned…

          I just wrote a blog of couple of hundred words…
          And I still firmly believe that the Catholic Pope does preach from Rome, yes sure the Vatican City… I lived there for a couple of years, and never noticed the border really!

          Oh,PS
          i am a feminist and a woman in black too…

          • Tzctboin says:

            You didn’t notice the border?

            Sorry, you can write quite well about some issues, but are you doing yourself no favours by posting such nonsense.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Lady Gaga isn’t an ally of the LGBT community; she’s a member of the LGBT community. She has publically self-identified as bisexual.

    So there’s that.

    And as a big ole queer, allow me to ask — if other allies dissuade you from supporting our basic human rights…how much of an ally are you, really?

  6. Oldboy says:

    To repost a quote I saw on Tumblr the other day: Lady Gaga is to the LGBT movement as PETA is to animal rights.

    She ISN’T a useful ally. She doesn’t advance debate in a significant way, or do anything really other than trumpet her support with loud, flashy speeches and her songs.

    Call me when she starts saying something significant.

    • Anonymous says:

      She isn’t an “ally” at all. She’s bisexual. And do try to think of another pop star (you know, what she says she is, not a member of think tank or someone writing for policy wonks) who could get a song containing the word “transgender” to the top of the charts.

      Go ahead. I’ll wait…

  7. Crashproof says:

    I was going to argue that that wig is blue, and looked at the RGB values and everything.

    And then I saw in the video, it looks green. Eh.

  8. Jake0748 says:

    My reaction to L. Gaga, when I first became aware of her, was “Meh, just another over-hyped, overly made-up pop star). But the more I learn of her, the more I respect what she is trying to do and say.
    Still not a huge fan of her music though. :p

    Another good, thought-provoking article – Thanks Jasmina, keep up the good work. :)

  9. Anonymous says:

    “…but the music – that insipid blend of rnb bravado, pop and the most annoying sounds from what is currently called ‘electro’ – really is genuinely horrible (get some taste in dance & electronic music young persons!)”

    Well, heck, the Beatles were a blend of the Everly Brothers, Little Richard, Carl Perkins, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Smokey Robinson, with a dash of the early ’60s girl groups. That doesn’t take anything away from what they accomplished.

    Of course, Lady Gaga didn’t invent a whole new musical form. Of course she’s been influenced by other, older sounds. There’s nothing new under the sun.

  10. Teller says:

    Miss Gaga may or may not be a ‘gay icon’ but she certainly wants to be since, as Madonna proved, it assures you of long-lasting success in the dance/club music scene.

  11. Anonymous says:

    This might put the Gaga illiterate into more understanding of where she is coming from in Pop music. Here’s a direct quote from a 1971 Rolling Stone interview with David Bowie “Pantomime Rock?” by John Mendelsohn:

    “In his floral-patterned velvet midi-gown and cosmetically enhanced eyes, in his fine chest-length blonde hair and mod nutty engineer’s cap that he bought in the ladies’ hat section of the City of Paris department store in San Francisco, David Bowie is ravishing, almost disconcertingly reminiscent of Lauren Bacall, although he would prefer to be regarded as the latter-day Garbo…”

    “…Should anyone think that these things are merely distractions or gimmicks intended to obscure the music’s shortcomings, he mustn’t come to my concerts. He must come on my terms or not at all. My performances have got to be theatrical experiences for me as well as for the audience. I don’t want to climb out of my fantasies in order to go up onstage – I want to take them on stage with me.”

    Bowie contends that rock in particular and pop in general should not be taken as seriously as is currently the fashion: “What the music says may be serious, but as a medium it should not be questioned, analysed, or taken so seriously. I think it should be tarted up, made into a prostitute, a parody of itself. It should be the clown, the Pierrot medium. The music is the mask the message wears – music is the Pierrot and I, the performer, am the message.”

  12. DiaphanyJones says:

    …but the music – that insipid blend of rnb bravado, pop and the most annoying sounds from what is currently called ‘electro’ – really is genuinely horrible (get some taste in dance & electronic music young persons!)

    But Gaga, Minogue, et al are brand new to each generation. By the time they figure out how lame and derivative it all is, there’ll be a new “icon”, a new crop of consumers, and, of course, the occasional adult blogger who mistakes such for importance. (Which is not to knock Lady Gaga, who seems likable enough.)

  13. Modusoperandi says:

    Civilian gays have been battered, criminalized and persecuted, notwithstanding the huge sex pedophilia scandals running among Catholic priests who have been getting away quite easily all these years with their criminal abuse of power.

    It’s late and I might be reading that wrong, but one thing is not the other. Don’t conflate the two.

    Anon #32 “They can believe what they want, but it isn’t always right to act on it. Would it OK to let churches refuse to perform interracial marriages to respect their opinion on the matter, or would that amount to allowing racial discrimination?”
    Actually, the White Power churches (at least in the US) don’t have to marry interracial couples (and a religious institution of one religion/sect/denomination/etc doesn’t have to marry a mixed couple or a couple from a different religion/sect/denomination/etc). The State faces no such restriction, as it, at least ideally*, serves all of its citizens.
    The Church can marry or refuse to marry you all you want, but legally it’s the certificate from the State that matters.

    * In the real world, Civil Rights for Unpopular Minorities are still a long walk uphill, though.

  14. Anonymous says:

    It’s always awesome to read a article about a serious subject and then try to read the comments only to find a bunch of idiots destroying any hope of meaningful dialog with their incessant Lady Gaga bashing.

  15. Tommy Angelo says:

    Oh, so you have one of those flashy thingies!

    That’s so cool…

  16. Anonymous says:

    Along with Kylie Minogue and an increasing list of performers who seem to know just how to sell to a particular audience using hooky pop tracks and prepubescent cheesy theatrics (mostly borrowed from Madonna) designed to ‘outrage’..

    Hey the message is good so it’s fine with me!

    …but the music – that insipid blend of rnb bravado, pop and the most annoying sounds from what is currently called ‘electro’ – really is genuinely horrible (get some taste in dance & electronic music young persons!)

    • Mister44 says:

      Bleh. You’re just old. It is solid Dance/Electronica and some of the best pop music in decades.

      The most striking similarity between her and Madonna is her success. There maybe other comparisons one could make, but over all she has made a clear distinction between herself and Madonna, eclipsing her in the realm of talent. Anyone who takes their name from a Queen song gets extra credit in my book.

      As for who the Church decides to marry or not is a completely moot point IMHO. A ‘religious’ marriage is between two people and that religion. It doesn’t matter really what those rules are nor if the state even recognizes it. Many straight marriages wouldn’t meet the requirements to be married in the Catholic church, such as if you were living together prior or wanted your wedding on the beach.

      I think we should leave ‘marriage’ in the realm of religion. For legal, state recognized marriages use the word ‘union’ or what have you. There is no reason for the state to base a legal definition on a religious act. Create a legal union and make these blind to gender. This is what is important for equality. Right now you can find a church to marry two of anything. That won’t get you anywhere with things like using a spouses’ health insurance.

      • Anonymous says:

        The most striking similarity between her and Madonna is her success.

        Except, you know, Born this Way and Express Yourself.

        I think we should leave ‘marriage’ in the realm of religion.

        Why? It hardly started there – marriages predate most churches you might care to name – so why abandon the name for the important political concept?

        • Mister44 says:

          re: “Except, you know, Born this Way and Express Yourself.”

          Pssshh. The similarities are minor. Someone with 7 top 10 singles from one album and on EP doesn’t need to rip off someone else to make a good song. Born this Way more differences than similarities and is a much better song.

          re: “Why? It hardly started there – marriages predate most churches you might care to name – so why abandon the name for the important political concept?”

          It’s all semantics at that point. Who cares what it is called under legal terms? In social terms the world ‘marriage’ would still be used.

          You can’t force a religious institution to perform a marriage. Whether a marriage is performed by a church or not has no bearing on its recognition by the state. If every church ok’ed gay marriage tomorrow, it wouldn’t matter in the eyes of the law.

          If calling it a ‘union’ or what ever will make more people support state recognized gay marriages – how is that a bad thing? That really is where the equality is wanted – right? Equality under the law for things like insurance, inheritance, etc.

          • Anonymous says:

            Calling it a union won’t. It’ll encourage a public perception of separate but equal – after all, if they were truly equal everyone would use the same word, right? – and as we all know, that won’t promote equality at all.

            As far as Madonna and Gaga, I don’t know why you can’t hear it, but the similarities are very prominent to my ears. Topical theme, vocal style, instrumentation, right down to tempo and chords. Certainly Lady Gaga doesn’t need to rip someone off, I think she simply liked the type and wanted to make more of it, but it’s definitely much closer to it than to most other pop music and even a lot of her older stuff.

      • teapot says:

        I don’t even know where to start.

      • sweetcraspy says:

        Mister44, I used to agree with you re. “civil union” vs “marriage” semantics. However, after a 101-type thread patiently talked me through the “separate but equal” objection, I was able to recognize that the same old civil rights issues are at the core of the LGBTQ equal rights movement.

        I would encourage you to find a 101 friendly site and talk through any issues that you are hung up on. Getting rid of the ethical cognitive dissonance left over from my Catholic upbringing was a big load off of my mind.

      • MrWednesday says:

        Bleh. You’re just old. It is solid Dance/Electronica and some of the best pop music in decades.

        Citation pls.

  17. nezolaszlo says:

    Why should the pope or the Catholic church condone marriages or civil unions for LGBT people? They have a set of beliefs in which there’s no place for such people and activities, and they have a right to believe so. Liberal thinkers tend to forget that freedom works both ways.
    Don’t get me wrong, I do support equal rights in marriage, but I also believe that we should let the pope and the catholics believe in whatever they want to believe.

    As for Lady Gaga, he also said in Rome that Budapest is a country (it is in fact a capital), and from what I’ve seen, she reinforces every gay stereotype that shouldn’t be reinforced, so I don’t think she is the most useful ally for the community.

    • Anonymous says:

      They can believe what they want, but it isn’t always right to act on it. Would it OK to let churches refuse to perform interracial marriages to respect their opinion on the matter, or would that amount to allowing racial discrimination?

    • Anonymous says:

      What people have a right to do and what they should do are very separate questions.

  18. Anonymous says:

    “Yesterday Italy also voted against nuclear power after Germany said a definite no”
    Besides that, Italy also voted to stop privatization of public water treatment companies and, the best of the 3 subjects that were voted, the abolishment of a law that prevented politicians for being investigated and criminally accused of anything. Judges in Italy have been waiting for years and years for this opportunity to chase after Berlusconi and his corrupt pals.
    Yesterday Italy released the hounds on Berlusconi and his muchachos!

  19. Antinous / Moderator says:

    In other news, The Beatles were no Andrews Sisters.

  20. emmdeeaych says:

    Where the Catholic church is concerned, gay marriages are not only a taboo topic but even a place of severe demonization….

    I can name a thousand things in the last thousand years that you could replace ‘gay marriage’ with in that sentence.

    The Roman Catholic Church stands in firm opposition to the freedom of the human spirit. Period.

    • Tzctboin says:

      No, it doesn’t.

      The Catholic church is not the monolith you would like to believe it is.

      In Mexico for example, the leaders of the Independence movement were mostly Catholic priests, who spoke Native languages and showed Native people how to go into more profitable businesses circumventing colonial laws.

      During John Paul II’s papacy the “Theology of Liberation”, spoused by priests familiar to the needs of the poor people, advocated for a different kind of apparoach to religiosity, unfortunately the hierarchy of the Church has been monopolyzed by retrograde individuals, often with nasty beliefs and strange excuses for their own shortcomings, but the struggle between authentic people with vision and the socially retrograde has always been there.

      Throughout history you can find many examples of a divided Church in which some people do the right thing and some others just do their own thing, but if you want to buy the Kool Aid about this monstrous institution that does no good, well it is up to you really.

      (saying all the above as an atheist mind you, it really grates me how some people in majoritary Protestant countries can be so simplistic about the biggest and originary Christian Church in the world).

  21. teapot says:

    You know, I’ve been an ally for a long time now, but Gaga is such an obnoxious attention whore, this makes me one tiny bit less committed.

    +1. I come here so I don’t have to read about hacks like her. I understand this is a LGBT issue which is a BB favourite, but why is there not a single article on the murder of gay rights activist David Kato? How about dedicating some time to people who are real champions of a cause?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/uganda-gay-rights-activist-murder

    Download a BBC documentary on the subject:
    http://atheistmovies.blogspot.com/2011/02/bbc-worlds-worst-place-to-be-gay.html

Leave a Reply