(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] covertmusic.livejournal.com at 07:19pm on 06/11/2008
Part of it is that the Nike ads are playing with commentatorese and street slang/trash-talk too. That might be part of the problem with them; different signifiers jump out to different people, and some of the attitudes signified might be in morally sketchy territory. Some kids think it's wicked, and some people think it's just wicked.

Anyway, about the Stagecoach ad, I totally agree, but what I was really trying to ask, clumsily as it turned out, was "what if all the characters in the Stagecoach ad were male?". Would a gay subtext be more controversial than a lesbian one? Instinctively, I think it would...
[parent entry] [link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] bugshaw.livejournal.com at 07:50am on 07/11/2008
I agree, I think a gay subtext would be more controversial. Perhaps because it's harder to ignore, she says, noting that in our culture Queen Victoria was happy to believe that lesbianism didn't exist and presumably the women were just friends. At least, that's the popular but probably over-simplified view of her position.
[link] [parent] [reply]

September

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
 6
 
7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
 11
 
 12
 
 13
 
14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
 20
 
21
1
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
 27
 
28
 
 29
 
 30