Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums

Confessit

Elitists
  • Content Count

    3,125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

4 Followers

About Confessit

  • Rank
    Everyone's entitled to my opinion.
  • Birthday 03/09/1990

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Www.madonna.com
  • Facebook URL
    Robb patrick
  • Twitter URL
    -
  • Instagram URL
    -

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    England
  • Interests
    Madonna
  • Favorite Madonna Song
    Rain

Recent Profile Visitors

3,837 profile views
  1. I see the essence of what your saying. The issue is complex and is hyper sensitive across the board. The issue with what JK said is that it was a sentence and a short reference that can be taken as transphobic. I think the consensus is if someone refers to a trans person as just that trans it is received negatively as a trans person has always been the gender they have chosen to become, not the gender they were born with. My issue with the whole debate considering JK Rowling and previous debates around the trans issue is what consummates transphobia? What is phobia anyway? What is homophobia? Well a phobia is fear if we are getting into the dictionary terminology. To me though it’s being negative with intention towards a trans person or a gay person. Some would consider all opposing opinions towards gay people homophobic, so anybody who doesn’t agree with it for religious reasons for one example they are a homophobe. I go to church sometimes and I have friends who attend who have an opposing view from me as I am gay but I do not class these people as homophobes. Some people have the opinion gay people shouldn’t marry. Again dependant upon the individual some would snap back and say your homophobic whilst others, like me, see it as an opinion. A narrow minded opinion but still an opinion. If someone is shouting discriminatory language to me on the street that I’m a fag that should die, well that goes from someone’s opinion to being hateful with intent. If someone incites harm to others for being gay or takes action against someone’s life for instance calling them names that’s homophobic. That’s just a very short perspective purely of ME I understand and accept some other gay people consider all religious people and homophobes straight away for the opinion they hold, and that’s okay it’s a belief we all have them! Back to the issue of trans. I have many friends who have both had and are having treatment to become the gender they were born as in their minds and hearts. I fully accept my friend is a man as much as I am, not a trans man just a man. But my personal belief is if someone believes the biology purely and not the fact that people are actually able to be born as a sex they go on to become and not the sex their bodies are I do not treat it as transphobic. I am not trans and I will not speak for them but there is a marked difference to having the opinion (my opinion is it is ignorant and not progressive) as oppose to someone who is cruel who will verbally or physically hurt a trans person. Not hate just the opinion they are a transitional male/female based on biology ideas. But it is an opinion and I don’t base someones gender on their biology I base it on what’s in their heads but some people don’t. Not all those people are hateful towards trans or the community and whilst it may not be the opinion of some it is the opinion of others. I don’t believe JK has been transphobic she has voiced an opinion regarding biology and basing that round her own life and how she feels. Not everyone agrees but some do.
  2. I never said that or at least that’s no true the point I was making..... society has changed and continues to change but censorship is not the answer in my opinion. We need to accept that films are made in times when society wasn’t as civilised as it is today. I remember watching Birth of a Nation at school and being horrified as we all were but it should remain as a reminder these things have happened. Shall we shut Auschwitz in that case and forget about it? But it happened we need to remember. YES that’s an extreme example but I’m afraid the principal is the same. If we start censoring the Arts I think it can lead to just removing things that make people uncomfortable in different areas where does one draw the line? I am just trying to debate this from a different perspective. That’s all. If they put it back with some kind of disclaimer then that’s fine but there are calls now for it never to be put back.
  3. I support the BLM campaign with all my heart but this is getting a tad ridiculous now (And is nothing directly to do with them it’s other people feeling a need to take action). Attempting to re-write history by removing films isn’t the answer. Surly these films are held up as a product of the times they were made and it’s a known fact racism existed as blatantly and disgustingly as depicted in GWTW. Removing it does nothing but hide away the fact it had the racist undertones. If we are going to open up the vaults and make decisions based on societies standards today then half of the films available would be taken down or given censor messages at the start. Take the bond films in the early days and how woman were treated for example absolutely disgraceful it wouldn’t happen in a modern Bond film now but does that mean we get rid of these and keep starting a fresh? I am not making this a contest between offences but where do we draw the line here there are so many films made that are a product of the day that are both old fashioned now and at times the content is viewed in todays pair of eyes as immoral. Trying to hide them is pointless they should remain and be lessons of shock to today’s audience particularly the younger audience to bring it home that such a world once existed. Because it did exist and we must all learn from it.
  4. The problematic idea of celebrating a person who has made their fortunes on the back of the slave trade by erecting a statue of them on a podium so they can be marvelled at on the streets of Britain is a pretty remarkable feat is it not? Whilst I firmly don’t agree with mindless vandalism of monuments such as Queen Victoria who has nothing to do personally with the slave trade and actually embraced foreign cultures with open arms, we need to address the statue issue sensibly . There is no denying that many people who have built buildings and created institutions in this country did make fortunes from keeping slaves and selling them. And I take the point many historic landmarks in ancient history were built by salves such as the Pyramids, The Colosseum and The Great Wall of China, but these creations are not celebrations to the person or persons who decided for them to be built. They themselves didn’t have an erected statue built years afterwards as a celebration of them. There is a marked difference between what is created on the appointment of somebody and a statue of them which in itself is a admirable achievement to get one of somebody on a podium on a street, surely there is a distinct difference? History of humanity is steeped in cruelty, prejudice, imperialism, judgement and elitism. The world has changed many times through what’s accepted in different generations and hopefully we get a step further towards being “more civilised” with every change. You can’t erase actual history so we must all learn from it. That’s exactly how things have changed in this country from woman getting the vote, child labour being outlawed and gay people not being thrown in prison. I propose drawing a line when it comes to statues and considering is it right to put this person on that platform publicly or is it better to have them belong in a museum where the full story can and should be told? I believe this is the environment for the men who may of shaped the landscape of Britain but did so on the back of the inhumane act of keeping slaves and profiting from them. Many people in history who have a statue held ideas “of their day” that by today’s standards are simply immoral, and the slave trade is but one. It’s a painful and disgusting one but it is one of many. Don’t forget many people for centuries in this country didn’t allow woman the same rights of men you’d be wiping out half the monuments that exists if you start unpicking history by what we accept and dont accept in 2020. I fully understand people’s disgust at statues of men who have profited in slavery and I agree they have no place on the street alongside other statues of scholars, scientists, monarchs and people who have had an impact on our national identity. But who decides who gets a platform anyway? There are only opinions at the end of the day so I say let’s have a constructive look at who has a statue and why? I agree at the ones removed thus far but they need to be in a museum so we can remember the capability of the human reach and at what cost. That way they are not “celebrated” lives on public display but their important stories can be told in a museum because currently most people wouldn’t know the true horror of their back story anyway and you can’t squeeze their back story on a tiny plaque. We need to look at the person and ask ourselves does this person deserve the platform because there needs to be a measure and hopefully the positive to come out of this will be food for thought for future committees and councils when deciding to green light a statue for a person.
  5. I agree these few parents protesting don’t represent the Muslim community anymore than I do. They shame the whole faith. I would of thought the UKs Equality Act Law would of prevented these protestors stopping it I thought it was the law now for same sex love/commitment to be taught in UK schools.
  6. It’s shocking stuff. He lied to the Queen it’s a serious abuse of his position. Surley he will reign now how can he carry on when his actions have been found unlawful.
  7. It's not. General election by the end of the year.
  8. Yet again she is making decisions based more on her political survival than the national intrerest
  9. I agree about your 3 options the way I see it is by the time the end of this ridiculous extension we will be in the same boat as we were on March 29th. I highly doubt the Queen will step in her constitutional position could be compromised and it would be bad PR all round the Queen and the PM get on and that's what works for Britain but I'm sure she is disgusted behind the net curtains of Buckingham palace at all this dragging through the mud.
  10. The extension to June 30th includes the European elections and if we are included in these in May it will be of enourmous embaresment. I know the prime minister doesn't want the UK involved in the up and coming elections but on paper we will still be for all purposes part of the EU. I just hope we don't have to be involved in these it will be a waste of time and effort all round.
  11. A calculated move to distract from the content most of the speech was just attacks on Corbyn anyway she only really discussed 2 policies. I work in the public sector and we continue to be run on a shoe string as usual under a Tory government. I hold UKIP very much accountable for all that propaganda and selling false facts to sway a leave and cause this torment.
  12. This demo will go down in history amongst fans as far as I can see as the most loved demo of any Madonna song!!!
  13. It's a shame Madonna is knee deep in tour prep as a weeks worth of promo...an assault on the radio as some TV spots to lap up the huge buzz of BIM this week/next week could get the song potentially into the top 20 and have some impact on the songs downloads and dare I say it.....some AirPlay stateside! God imagine if Fallon was this week.....
  14. Without some radio surpor next week in the states, it will drop off.... I can't see another week of 15million views. I just wish Madonnas team had the video ready to drop on the Monday instead of delays.... This looks like the only chance she will get of a song in the BB100 and those few days of streams has cost her a decent place on the chart.
×
×
  • Create New...