LGBT in Progressive Rock

Champion the wonder hoooorse......

^ they did.

Dean wrote: Epignosis wrote: And people wonder why I always use Times New Roman. Serif fonts = clarity, of which I am a champion. Serif fonts for print clarity. Sans-serif font for on-screen readability.

My font at 3 isn't readable? 

Dean wrote: Epignosis wrote: Dean wrote: Epignosis wrote: And people wonder why I always use Times New Roman. Serif fonts = clarity, of which I am a champion. Serif fonts for print clarity. Sans-serif font for on-screen readability. My font at 3 isn't readable?  Having to size it to three to make it readable says it all Rob

Get glasses telescopes old man. 

The_Jester wrote: And David Bowie is bisexual too.

EDIT:  Zoiks, that's 25 minutes of my life I'll never get back!!!

colorofmoney91 wrote: I just wanted to recognize and honor LGBT prog musicians on this site as kind of a "good thing" to do because of all the negativity regarding the community in the news lately (the suicides and whatever else). I just wanted to be positive.

that's good and noble pursuit.  It's sad that kids commit suicide because they feel so "wrong" and "different".  I suppose this is the era of good role models "coming out".  

I was talking to a facebook friend who is also a progressive rock artist in a band with his boyfriend.  We were talking about the almost total lack of LBGT presence in progressive rock.

I think part of that is because Progressive Rock often deals with weightier, conceptual matters in contrast to popular music which is basically about Cars, Love and Partying.    I agree with Epi that music is intrinsically NOT Christian or Gay or Auburn, but it can deal with subject matter on those elements, which can unite groups - like Affectionates For Auburn

Dean wrote: for example you cannot "get" Phideaux's sexual preference from listening to Snowtorch or Doomsday Afternoon.

I wondered if someone would bring me into this...  :-)
[Thanks Dean for not outing any LBGT prog musicians in this most shaggy dogged thread.]

Epignosis wrote: Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people's sexual preferences.  I don't care.  I don't know how it is in other countries, but I'm tired of looking at the news to find out so-and-so is gay, or that so-and-so is denying being gay.  Why are we so interested in this?  I'm certainly not.  My favorite female comedian is Ellen DeGeneres.  She is hilarious.  However, it kind of annoys me that she takes her homosexuality on her show.  It puts me off.  At the same time, I'm very sorry we even live in a country that dictates what is and isn't a marriage.

I think that's part of the point though, Epig (and I have since read the whole thread to learn that you are against homosexuality on moral grounds).  You don't need to hear about people's sexual preference because your preference is the default.  Some people who are "other" feel alone (which heterosexuals don't feel because they are the norm).  So, those who feel "other" feel comfort in knowing that there are other "other" people like them.  The quantity of kisses and looks and hearts and roses on TV for hetero people are uncountable.  That's why LGBT want to see some representation of themselves on a show, like Ellen, or whoever.  There is growing evidence that gayness is genetic and if that is true then there are tiny babies being born who are predestined to become gay and they will need positive role models as well.

I saw a recent show in L.A. called Gay Historgy, which was a very interesting show because it celebrated Gay people of note through the centuries.  90% of these gay people are not known to be gay in history because that part of their life has been scrubbed from the official record as being in "poor taste" to talk about.  Now, in our post modern world, there are people who want to redress this imbalance.  Those who fall in the spectrum of the "norm" have good role models all day long, and have good reflections to compare their lives with.  It's those who are living in isolation who crave knowledge that there are other people living with the same story.

I was surprised about Leonardo Da Vinci!  I mean, he's only the greatest genius who ever lived!





Edited by Phideaux - June 17 2012 at 20:44

Uhhh, no, Leonardo had no female lovers of record ever.  He had several close male apprentices, one of whom he bequeathed the Mona Lisa to upon his death.  He was also accused of practicing sodomy but the charges were dismissed (and some said it was because one of the corespondents' family exerted its influence.  Scholars are divided upon whether he was celibate or remained a practicing homosexual, but none have accused him of having female lovers.

He probably lived like his bitter rival Michelangelo, a celibate man who wrote many homoerotic love poems, but was said to be probably celibate.

Those gays were probably too afraid to have at it in those days since it was the death penalty for such sexual play.

Also, we must stay on top of the research into pre-natal gayness.  This just in: 

Edited by Phideaux - June 19 2012 at 00:10

Yes, but what you believe or don't believe isn't the issue.  Our modern view of the favourability of things is immaterial.  Homosexuality has existed since the dawn of time.   We can't know what he did or didn't do.  However, the bulk of evidence points to Leonardo being gay, and most scholars agree (whether he was practicing or not) it was his most likely his orientation.  Of course, that makes sense since he was such a sensitive and unique genius. 

and by the way, re> Mona Lisa

team of researchers from the Italian national committee for cultural heritage are claiming that Da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa”, the most famous painting in the world, was inspired by the artist’s male apprentice Salai. The pair are said to have had an “ambiguous” relationship and were probably lovers said Silvano Vincenti, chairman of the committee.

The effeminate young artist, whose real name was Gian Giacomo Caprotti, is thought to have served as a muse for other Da Vinci masterpieces, like “St.John the Baptist” and the “Angel Incarnate”. Comparisons between the characters in these works, and the characteristics of the Mona Lisa reveal striking similarities.

Edited by Phideaux - June 19 2012 at 00:21

CCVP wrote: I've never seen any of those "scientists" going through any competent interviewer as I've seen the others that claim that hormones and social background / experiences. i'm not ruling out the possibility, I'm just way more skeptical about genetic  "evidence" of gayness; after all, we've all been hearing that science is on the "brink of discovering" the genetic reason for homosexuality for the past 15 years or so and, besides, it does not explain why women are homosexual.

How long have they been able to search for genes for any "thing" or disease?  How much money is thrown into research into these ideas?  It is a very new field.  It has only become possible with the genome project and sequencing of the human genetic code.  Although people have identified broken chromosomes and genetic diseases, it's only quite recently that they've undertaken to explain characteristics via genetics.  Give them time.

However, since "gayness" exists in the nature and in the animal kingdom, it hardly makes sense that it comes about entirely by "choice" and "environment".  And, it is certainly possible that there is a genetic basis for female homosexuality as well. 

Phideaux wrote: Epignosis wrote: Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people's sexual preferences.  I don't care.  I don't know how it is in other countries, but I'm tired of looking at the news to find out so-and-so is gay, or that so-and-so is denying being gay.  Why are we so interested in this?  I'm certainly not.  My favorite female comedian is Ellen DeGeneres.  She is hilarious.  However, it kind of annoys me that she takes her homosexuality on her show.  It puts me off.  At the same time, I'm very sorry we even live in a country that dictates what is and isn't a marriage. I think that's part of the point though, Epig (and I have since read the whole thread to learn that you are against homosexuality on moral grounds).  You don't need to hear about people's sexual preference because your preference is the default.  Some people who are "other" feel alone (which heterosexuals don't feel because they are the norm).  So, those who feel "other" feel comfort in knowing that there are other "other" people like them.  The quantity of kisses and looks and hearts and roses on TV for hetero people are uncountable.  That's why LGBT want to see some representation of themselves on a show, like Ellen, or whoever.  There is growing evidence that gayness is genetic and if that is true then there are tiny babies being born who are predestined to become gay and they will need positive role models as well.

My post here was referencing the preoccupation with homosexuality by heterosexuals (most of the people who watch Ellen, for example, are not gay).  This isn't about some need to find people similar to us- it's a prurient interest in gossip and speculation.  And does ABC even know how to produce a show without sexuality becoming a highlight?  It's become cliche, hasn't it?