Does Lady Gaga represent the end of the sexual revolution?

why do you feel it necessary to "tread carefully" around feminist...because the majority of them seem so overtly bitchy and angry at the slightest offense to women? I think the "feminists" that are like that are immensely insecure, I agree a bit with what you say gaga represents, I dont know her as a person but from what we as "normal" people witness from her celeb how she expresses her "sexuality" is not really innovative...I think it's easier for women to be disguise their promiscuity with the phrase "i'm sexually free" instead of calling it what it is (promiscuous)

Uum guys don't care we just want to see her do a porn-o. But then again we want to see every woman but our moms doing porn.

According to some people...

http://tangledupinlace.tumblr.com/post/1146210889/women-are-sexualized-and-objec...

There is.

Their weapon of choice is Masturbation because apparently, men don't like women getting off. This is news to me.

He was just the end of the pedophilia revolution, I'm sorry to inform you.

heh, he was never convicted, you know.

You'd be surprised how well the judicial system treats the immensely rich. Then again...

He settled.

Exactly!

Civil suite:
Millions of dollars.

Jail time:
20 years/millions of dollars in lost income.

Selling out your own sexually violated child:
Priceless!

Some people try to live vicariously through celebrities. It's called escapism. They associate the celebrity of their choice as them and thus seek to lift them to ever scaling heights. The rest of us play World of Warcraft.

THAT Madonna to Gaga comparison is at least "apples to apples". ( and I agree with your assessment ) +^d

only the good ones made it out you mean

Actually, a lot of them are still floating around but they sound so different they're hard to recognize. I don't really listen to the new rock music any more. It sucks.

I agree.

unfortunately that's a dream that will never come true (the current part)

I think it's weird too. The only reason I can think so many people focus on them, is because they seem to live a life most people can only dream about, and many people think they don't have any problems and live like Kings and Queens. This is true for some of them, but most of them are not Paris Hiltons. They had to scratch and claw to get to where they are now.

In my lifetime I've gotten to do many of things that wealthy people do --e.g. party at the Playboy Mansion, travel around the world and eat at fine restaurants, sing in front of a cheering crowd, work my ass off in the recording studio, wear nice clothes, so I don't feel that left out of the experience of a lucky cosmopolitan man. However many people will never experience these things and long to get break free from their mundane 9 to 5 lives.

I have never bought a car based on whatever hot "cheesecake" or "beefcake" is standing next to it. And people who think like this are quite shallow and sad in my opinion

Now if there was a chance I could go to signing or personal appearance and test drive the car and get a picture next to Zac Efron for example, I might be interested in that. But what will ultimately sell the car to me is how it's engineered, if I'm in the market to buy a car, what kind of reputation it has, how it's built and how long it's expected to last. This is how I make any important purchase. I do research.

And I'm glad for that, both because you're buying it for the right reason, although I will never look at a cheesecake the same way again.

But asides that, it's not the total thing. It isn't limited to just the auto industry; plenty of people out there will buy anything given the right usage or endorsement (a massive example of this is celebrity-endorsed clothing lines). The message I was sending out wasn't limited to just cars, but it's good to know someone's not buying cars because Tila Tequila is standing half naked in front of it.

+^'d I love cheesecake...

At one point I hated cheesecake, then I tried some chocolate cheesecake and I repented right then and there.

Is it disturbing that anyone would go through an entire post without noticing their caps lock was on, or intentionally use it to gain attention, perhaps even that they considered it to be cool? Yes.

Gee sounds like someone else we are familiar with, doesn't it? I don't even need to mention her name. Lady Gaga does that because we fall for it, hook, line and "stinker" every time.

oooohhh is it a guessing game now?!
my guess: MADONNA!!!

although, i like her hahaha. some of her stuff can be really damn good and varied! she was definitely inspiring for a generation, but certainly not anymore.

Gaga will definitely be headed down that road. an older lady respected by some of the true fans, but remembered by all.

Yes I was referring to Madonna. You win a massage.

I just think this article is like what they publish in the National Enquirer. It's just idle entertainment fodder. Everyone knows that Lady Gaga really isn't a force to be reckoned with and has nothing to do with the end of the sexual revolution. HIV took care of that. And that happen when Lady Gaga was born perhaps? And we know all of her tricks. She's nothing new. It's all been done before.

Is that a +1 next to you? Where am I, is this Current? (double checks)

i know right! lol

+^'d ya to 2

I +^'d you for that.

For the most part I agree with you, Vix -- although I also believe that men perpetuate the stereotype by HIRING the hot young female reporters over those women who are judged to be "less aesthetically pleasing." Chris Berman alone is testament to the fact that the same hiring guidelines don't apply to men.

I am not sure I can give you a definitive answer on whether men would be uncomfortable around women like Sainz in the locker room. Some probably would, but I think most would have the same reaction I would have: While I am a man and men get erections, to say that it is rare that we get them in the men's locker room is an understatement. But if a sexily dressed woman insists on entering the men's locker room while I am tired, freshly showered and nude...I see no reason why I should go to any great effort to throttle my natural reaction...I would keep it under a towel, but...

Instant towel rack!

Or tent, depending on whether one is standing or sitting.

Actually the end of the sexual revolution would imply that the liberalization of previous conservative attitudes, morals and behaviors about sex is ending. This does not imply that sex is going to lose it's appeal.

In order for (edit) the end of this sexual revolution to happen, sexuality would have to lose it's appeal, or at least lose it's place on the taboo mantle of America.

I don't think you understand what the author is saying. Sex HAS lost it's place on the "taboo mantle" of America, hence the obsession with sex that we see now. What the author is implying is the sexual revolution was about the "freeing" of women to allow them to be sexual in a natural way as opposed to the stiff previous view of the 40's and 50's that sex was something to be ashamed of or not talked about. It was about women not having to wait for a man to ask them out, not needing to be married to have sex, and embracing themselves as sexual creatures because that is what they are. The author is stating that there is nothing natural about Gaga's facade, that it is calculated and marketed and does nothing to empower women, and in-fact encourages a "falseness" and a "warpedness" that contradicts everything that the sexual revolution stands for. The sexual revolution has already happened, and if it is coming to a close, this still has nothing to do with sex losing it's appeal.

Exceptionally well put, vix. A few years back, Britney Spears inspired legions of 10, 11, 12 year-old girls to show as much flesh as they could possibly get away with. That wasn't empowerment or liberation either. It was exploitation.

The sexual liberation of women has, in general, been beneficial for both sexes...just as many promised it would be. For so long there was this odd dynamic in which -- especially with regard to their early sexual experiences -- men were almost considered to be doing sex TO a woman rather than having sex WITH a woman. The latter -- which is much more predominant after the developments you describe -- is, of course, infinitely more satisfying for all concerned, IMHO.

No, I understand just fine. The "taboo mantle" I refer to isn't the suppression of women and sexuality that existed in the 40's and 50's. I refer to the "we allow it but look down on it" taboo. The way that sodomy is viewed nowadays. In order for this sexual revolution to come to an end, sexuality would have to lose it's appeal. We would have to be turned off by the "falseness" of Lady Gaga and those like her.

I will -
"Sweaty healthy low body fat women in simple functional cotton apparel just finished in the gym or toiling in the fields or winery,... drinking burgundy roughly and messily from a wine skin,....body drenched with the spill, standing in the bright spring sun,...her loyal war dogs sitting in obedient attention at her heels. Oh,....and add a cool bracing breeze to that. "

- and make the NOWHERE near the city,.....ANY city !

- - - this "genuine" eroticism could be evolved further.

my grandma listens to gaga so yeah she's got influence, being a pop star doesn't make you culturally insignificant. i mean when you've got harry reid listening to your tweets, you've got power.

I'm not saying that all pop stars are culturally insignificant. I'm saying that her significance is likely to wane and someone else will likely take her place as the "it" thing. She is this decade's Beanie Baby. People are convinced that she's worth far more than she really is. My Grandma hoarded rare Beanie babies in a glass case in her bedroom and was convinced that they would eventually be worth a large fortune. Needless to say, they were nothing more than manufactured novelties. The fact that your Grandma likes Gaga doesn't attest to the staying power of a fad so much as it proves that the elderly are susceptible to fads as well.

@mariased:
i disagree w/ you. elton john and david bowie still carry significant influence. elton is more often in the lime-light, but both were experimental with style, look, attitude, sexuality - and they both have a LOT of talent. i think gaga has similar affluence. she's insanely talented, and she attracts the freaks (and non freaks alike) -and i think her that will carry her beyond "this decade's beanie baby." -her style is self made and it is what it is- and people remember it, which is the point and it's more than a lot of pop stars in our generation have done. for those that are comparing her to madonna etc,-- madonna still packs out a stadium. food for thought.

Talented in what way?

David Bowie was influential because he was doing something different musically as well as with his image. When stripped of her outlandish outfits Gaga's music is fairly generic. Granted, I've seen videos of her before her Lady Gaga image and she is a skilled pianist, but that isn't reflected in her hit records .

Yes, she is a skilled pianist, and perhaps if more of her songs featured this I may be inclined to acknowledge her ability, but without that she really is no different than J Lo, Shakira, and the like.
Besides, lots of skilled pianists continue to contribute mediocre music to the airwaves.

gaga may not be experimenting with "new" music but she creating all of her own music. she also designs all of her own fashion. and at least half of what bowie is known for is his freakish performances....as well as his open but mysterious sexuality. you have to look at the overall picture, or else you're missing the point. gaga knows exactly what she's doing - this isnt some fumbling kid from the disney store being controlled by "the powers that be" - rather she's jumped ship early in the game with her own production co. - using her talents to appear BIG ....and that's what it takes to surpass one decade. madonna's music wasn't anything "new" - she was a badass pop star who's 50 something years old and still attracting crowds. is gaga bowie exactly? or elton john exactly? no...but she knows how to make a statement...and knows that if she wants to keep doing what she's passionate about (music), she has to go "big."

@themotivated dropout,
she can sing. she can dance, she writes her own material....she designs her own fashion, want me to keep going?

She writes her own material?
I wouldn't be so proud of that.

She can sing and dance?
So can Jennifer Lopez.
And Fergie.

She designs her own fashion?
Meh. Ok.

Yes keep going please.

@motivateddropout.
actually, in this day and age, that is a big deal. b.spears doesn't right her own material and can't sing, yet she does quite well for her self. the modern pop star doesn't have significant talent, but they look good, so corp prod. companies make them huge- and that's a large list of people. that's the "business" and they won't last quite as long- and gaga does it all herself, which is something to be proud of. she 's insanely talented at the piano and she can entertain and get people on their feet. actually, her song "speechless" was written as a plea to her father during a difficult time in his life. many of her songs have more depth to them than the let on, listen to her interviews. let's take a look at the vocal diva's. celine dion: most think she's cheezy, but her vegas shows are popular, she's had a career that went for two decades, she never wrote any of her songs, and yet her popularity is enormous. the greatest star ever? eh, maybe not, but if she can do it w/ minimal efforts, then gaga (who's influences are more than just "eh") can do it w/ all that she's offering. she's the star that "does it all" in a way, and takes control of her own career and process- that's talented, that's important for her success in entertainment.

I absolutely agree with you that in the pool of modern pop stars, lady gaga is more respectable than her peers.
If you asked any of these girls, however, about the meaning of their self written songs, you'd get a story that's slightly tragic but ultimately uplifting. Maybe even deep. That doesn't make it good.
Granted I haven't watched any interviews with her, I'm not blown away by the quality of her music.
Ok so she manages every aspect of her career. Well that's certainly noteworthy, but as long as her career is a punch line (the jonas brothers sell out arenas, but are absolutely a punch line) then I wouldn't call it talent. If she turns her career around and produces an album of self written music that is well written and devoid of gimmicks, then hell, I'll go to her concert.

@motivateddropout-
to each his own. i do think though, as many big namers before her (which were subject to debate when THEY emerged) - she 'll outlast the jonas brothers.

It really is a slur to have Bowie compared to Gaga as a "musician". As a "performer",..."theater act",.....well,...o.k. Perhaps she can even act,...who knows.
Bowie was part of a GROUND BREAKING and brilliant wave of music creation and music history.

While both performers bring the theater to the "art rock", bowie adds a great deal of experimental musicianship,....Gaga,...uhm,.... vaudeville perhaps ?

I agree with that fully. +^d

The fashion design bit is worth some points, I think.
I don't CARE if musicians can "dance"; DANCERS "dance".
Musicians play instruments "well" or better,....and the GOOD ONES write music with depth, complexity,..poignancy,....OR,....at least,...CATCHY CATCHY CATCHY tunes.

Costume designers really should be doing costume design. ( Still kewl though )