Boy - Is A Gay Album

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
financeguy said:
Homophobia has a face and a name, and it dwells amongst us.

And it dares to CLAIM to take its inspiration from
something called 'morality' and something it dares to call 'God' and the 'holy book'.

And then it procedes to present its thoughts as somehow approximating to intellectual debate, and it presents its analysis as something other than blind prejudice (which is what it is).

That's all.

That's all.

But don't fear, cos the spirit she moves in mysterious ways... :wink:
Click to expand...

I really hope that post was sarcasm. Hard to tell through type and smileys. I'll just assume it was.
 
financeguy said:
Homophobia has a face and a name, and it dwells amongst us, and it dwells in this thread.

And it dares to CLAIM to take its inspiration from
something called 'morality' and something it dares to call 'God' and the 'holy book'.

And then it procedes to present its thoughts as somehow approximating to intellectual debate, and it presents its analysis as something other than blind prejudice (which is what it is).

That's all.

That's all.

But don't fear, cos the spirit she moves in mysterious ways... :wink:
Click to expand...

:up: It's pure evil.
 
financeguy said:



I hope you don't use your Bible to justify homophobia.
Click to expand...

This is really getting rediculous. Can moderators lock this thread soon. To make such a disgusting claim is offensive. Who here was Bible thumping or even mentioning religion. So not only are the people who don't find gay messages in "Twilight" ignorant, uninformed, and have sloppy arguements, but now they are Bible thumping Christian wackos. My God, what has happened to this thread?

So let me get this straight. People make a thread that says they found something interesting in a book that says Bono wrote lyrics that in HINDSIGHT could be interperated as homosexual. Then about a page of posts are replied to state that some see it and some don't and everything is fine and dandy. Then people start to criticize eachother which results in most people leaving except for Niceman and a few others who support the idea of gay undertones in the music. Niceman is taken out of context and said to be a homophobic, which is once again happening to me, to which I decide to post in defense of him. Then we are called ignorant and uninformed because we don't read a study that had NOTHING to do with the topic at hand until someone ELSE brought it up on their own accord. To which everyone proceeds to say that their opinion is ok to have but mine and others are not because A.) We don't read Queer Studies B.) We're homophobics C.) We're wrong

Alright, good to see how this topic works. Thanks for the insight.
 
^
Well to be honest, I find that FG (your still here right?) was indeed being a hypocrite with that post, people are allowed opinions.

I'm not trying to advocate any particular point of view but ignorance and hypocrisy can come from anyone.

Why can’t we all get along? Yes that may sound like a naïve call for sanity but it’s needed.



joyfulgirl said:
Nice post, ZeroDude. Nothing contentious there at all--just a beautifully balanced and articulate expression of what IMO are the two most obvious interpretations of these ambiguous lyrics. I really like the Wilde connection and Tolstoy quote. :up:
Click to expand...

Thank you, I just find that even the supposedly "open minded" are too closed off to empathise with other people's opinions.
 
Last edited:
^
Leave it.



financeguy said:



Drama queen alert. :(
Click to expand...

Now you're dragging the thread down. Just let the petty and trivial arguments cease for the sake of what has been a decent discussion.
 
financeguy said:




Go home and get your shoe shine box and listen to Pat Robertson or somethin.

You're annoying me.
Click to expand...

Ok, so that makes it: Ignorant, uninformed, wrong, bible thumpers, and now a right wing freak. Because we all know that there are no such things as Christian Bible Thumping Democrats. :rolleyes:

There's no point in continuing this "discussion" with such a bigot. Thank you so much for showing me that TRUE hypocritical ignorance is still alive and kicking. Bravo!
 
catlhere said:
Ignorant, uninformed, wrong, bible thumpers, and now a right wing freak. !
Click to expand...

Don't be so harsh on yourself. I am sure there is counselling or something like that available. You really mustn't be so negative on yourself.
 
maybe the mods should close this. i keep forgetting that this isn't fym, and people aren't used to the intellectual give-and-take that characterizes that forum.

but i do need to respond to something;



catlhere said:

So not only are the people who don't find gay messages in "Twilight" ignorant, uninformed, and have sloppy arguements, but now they are Bible thumping Christian wackos. My God, what has happened to this thread?
Click to expand...



putting aside the charges of homophobia -- which i have not made -- you are absolutely wrong in that i think you are ignorant if you don't *agree* with the homosexual subtext of Twilight. however, if you are going to disagree, please back it up with an argument that is based in that particular text. the way that you and Niceman have responded is in the most juvenile way possible -- a way that Yolland artfully pointed out -- that you're equating a queer reading of the lyrics to the type of tee-hee, giggle-giggle 6th grade reading of everything as "gay." that is an insult first to me, because i took effort way back on page 2 of this thread to point out this subtext, and also an insult to Queer Studies. by tossing up such garbage posts like Niceman's where he read "gayness" into the lyrics of the Joshua Tree revealed his ignorance about what one means by a queer reading, and how one performs a queer analysis. it is a specific thing, and yes, i have had training in the subject. i've done queer readings of "rebel without a cause," of Eyes Wide Shut," and traced the evolution of gangster films -- from the Godfather through Goodfellas to The Sopranos -- as a crisis of masculinity. i did well on those papers, and it wasn't because i was able to say "the christmas trees in EWS are multicolored and therefore represent a multitude of sexual options for tom cruise." it's far more complex than that, requires far more thought and schooling in literary theory and more than just a passing familiarity with queer history (i'll note ZeroDude's great post that aptly picked up the Oscar Wilde reference, and i'll point to the homosocial reference in "shadows and tall trees" which is the title of one of the last chapters in _lord of the flies_) and for you and Niceman to make a mockery of that, i'm sorry, as both a former student and as a gay man, how else can i respond but to think that you're ignorant?

note that i didn't say you were homophobic, you were just ignorant to the work that was being done, and continues to be done by people in this thread, with the lyrics from Twilight.

i'm a little sorry that the charges of homophobia were leveled at you, because now it gives you such an easy out and an easy way to excuse and recuse yourself from the conversation.
 
Irvine511 said:
maybe the mods should close this. i keep forgetting that this isn't fym, and people aren't used to the intellectual give-and-take that characterizes that forum.

but i do need to respond to something;







putting aside the charges of homophobia -- which i have not made -- you are absolutely wrong in that i think you are ignorant if you don't *agree* with the homosexual subtext of Twilight. however, if you are going to disagree, please back it up with an argument that is based in that particular text. the way that you and Niceman have responded is in the most juvenile way possible -- a way that Yolland artfully pointed out -- that you're equating a queer reading of the lyrics to the type of tee-hee, giggle-giggle 6th grade reading of everything as "gay." that is an insult first to me, because i took effort way back on page 2 of this thread to point out this subtext, and also an insult to Queer Studies. by tossing up such garbage posts like Niceman's where he read "gayness" into the lyrics of the Joshua Tree revealed his ignorance about what one means by a queer reading, and how one performs a queer analysis. it is a specific thing, and yes, i have had training in the subject. i've done queer readings of "rebel without a cause," of Eyes Wide Shut," and traced the evolution of gangster films -- from the Godfather through Goodfellas to The Sopranos -- as a crisis of masculinity. i did well on those papers, and it wasn't because i was able to say "the christmas trees in EWS are multicolored and therefore represent a multitude of sexual options for tom cruise." it's far more complex than that, requires far more thought and schooling in literary theory and more than just a passing familiarity with queer history (i'll note ZeroDude's great post that aptly picked up the Oscar Wilde reference, and i'll point to the homosocial reference in "shadows and tall trees" which is the title of one of the last chapters in _lord of the flies_) and for you and Niceman to make a mockery of that, i'm sorry, as both a former student and as a gay man, how else can i respond but to think that you're ignorant?

note that i didn't say you were homophobic, you were just ignorant to the work that was being done, and continues to be done by people in this thread, with the lyrics from Twilight.

i'm a little sorry that the charges of homophobia were leveled at you, because now it gives you such an easy out and an easy way to excuse and recuse yourself from the conversation.
Click to expand...

I excuse myself from the conversation because there is nothing left to say. It has boiled down to having to back up your feelings on a musical piece. No, I don't have to. I can see where homosexual tones may be in "Twilight" but it is not what I believe the song is about. End of story. I don't need to back up why I think this. The fact that it is my opinion should be good enough. I don't need you to explain all the books and essays you've read on "Queer Research" to agree that your point is Valid. I've been saying all thread that it's fine to find those things in music, and I'm happy everyone is interperating the song in their own way. What I'm not taking a liking to, is how people immediately pounced on my defending of someone who was targetted as a homophobic and just plain wrong because some people couldn't even fathom that another person may feel a different way. As far as the mocking goes, right or wrong, the point I was trying to make is that just because YOU aren't looking at those Joshua Tree lyrics in terms of Queer Studies does NOT mean that they couldn't be looked at. That wasn't my discussion, so I can't tell you why they are homosexual or not, but I'm sure someone else could. Just because it's not obvious to YOU why a lyric in The Joshua Tree is homosexual, or whatever, doesn't make it not so. Just like it's not right for me to say that "Twilight" makes no gay references, which is close-minded. If I wanted to go into why I would think that the line I mocked in Acrobat had a gay undertone, I probably could, but that wasn't my intention. All I came here to do was to defend someone who was being attacked on all sides, and being falsely called homophobic or ignorant or whatever. I wanted to explain the opposite side's view and hope that everyone could say they accept my opinion, but that didn't happen. First with the 3 of you just basically giving me the opinion that I am wrong and have no right to say I disagree with the topic because I haven't read the books you have on Queer Studies. Those studies we're not brought in here until YOU decided to bring them in, so I have every right to say I don't think the topic is correct, wether or not I have been versed in that or not. Then with FinanceGuy just basically resorting to 3rd grade insults to try and prove his/her point. This has been a very strange thread, and I've tried my best to defend Niceman while also being civil and trying to gain acceptance of the opposing side's feelings, but now it's come to a point where insults are being thrown around for not conforming. I'm sorry but I will not conform because someone calls me a Bible thumper. I will not conform because I haven't read some books. Music is about feeling, it's not about books. I feel differently, and that's ok. I know it's ok to feel differently because that's why Bono writes his songs, to give us fans something to believe in, and if I choose to believe in something different than the people in this thread, it's perfectly fine, and I'm not ignorant, or wrong, or homophobic for doing it. Thanks to you for making good points and enlightening me on a subject I didn't know much of. (Queer Studies and whatnot) Cya.
 
What the hell is wrong with you two. Two smart, intellegent posters engaging in what is just a bitter show of immaturity.

Meaningful and well thought out posts get hijaked because people here always seem to have to deviate off of meaningfull discussion with seudo-intellectual name calling and horseplay.

Cant we just have a repectful conversation?
 
catlhere said:
I excuse myself from the conversation because there is nothing left to say. It has boiled down to having to back up your feelings on a musical piece. No, I don't have to. I can see where homosexual tones may be in "Twilight" but it is not what I believe the song is about. End of story. I don't need to back up why I think this. The fact that it is my opinion should be good enough. I don't need you to explain all the books and essays you've read on "Queer Research" to agree that your point is Valid. I've been saying all thread that it's fine to find those things in music, and I'm happy everyone is interperating the song in their own way. What I'm not taking a liking to, is how people immediately pounced on my defending of someone who was targetted as a homophobic and just plain wrong because some people couldn't even fathom that another person may feel a different way. As far as the mocking goes, right or wrong, the point I was trying to make is that just because YOU aren't looking at those Joshua Tree lyrics in terms of Queer Studies does NOT mean that they couldn't be looked at. That wasn't my discussion, so I can't tell you why they are homosexual or not, but I'm sure someone else could. Just because it's not obvious to YOU why a lyric in The Joshua Tree is homosexual, or whatever, doesn't make it not so. Just like it's not right for me to say that "Twilight" makes no gay references, which is close-minded. If I wanted to go into why I would think that the line I mocked in Acrobat had a gay undertone, I probably could, but that wasn't my intention. All I came here to do was to defend someone who was being attacked on all sides, and being falsely called homophobic or ignorant or whatever. I wanted to explain the opposite side's view and hope that everyone could say they accept my opinion, but that didn't happen. First with the 3 of you just basically giving me the opinion that I am wrong and have no right to say I disagree with the topic because I haven't read the books you have on Queer Studies. Those studies we're not brought in here until YOU decided to bring them in, so I have every right to say I don't think the topic is correct, wether or not I have been versed in that or not. Then with FinanceGuy just basically resorting to 3rd grade insults to try and prove his/her point. This has been a very strange thread, and I've tried my best to defend Niceman while also being civil and trying to gain acceptance of the opposing side's feelings, but now it's come to a point where insults are being thrown around for not conforming. I'm sorry but I will not conform because someone calls me a Bible thumper. I will not conform because I haven't read some books. Music is about feeling, it's not about books. I feel differently, and that's ok. I know it's ok to feel differently because that's why Bono writes his songs, to give us fans something to believe in, and if I choose to believe in something different than the people in this thread, it's perfectly fine, and I'm not ignorant, or wrong, or homophobic for doing it. Thanks to you for making good points and enlightening me on a subject I didn't know much of. (Queer Studies and whatnot) Cya.
Click to expand...
enter_key.jpg
 
Isn't it true that the original cover of Boy was changed in the US from the boy to the drawings of Bono because Boy became big in the underground gay clubs of SF, but because of the Boy on the cover people took it to have pedophile overtones, and the band didn't want anyone to think they were pedophiles, gay or straight? I know I did read this years ago, perhaps the story still exists on line somewhere?
 
When first hearing this song in the 1981, I always thought Twilight was a song about Bono trying to flee a Gay Pedophile.

Note this line-

"The old man tried to walk me home
I thought he should have known"

The old man "tried" to walk Bono home, and Bono was having no part of it.



That said, if the author of the song, Bono initailly said that he never thought the Boy album was meant to have any gay meaning those words should end the argument.

That Bono later became friendly to the Gay movement is a whole other topic about his personal and polictical evolution.

To me Queer reading = Gay extrapolation, and that is clearly evident by the 'embrace' of the Gay culture in the early 1980's on how they embraced this album en masse when the author of it admitted that the lyrics penned at the time were never his original intention.

dbs
 
I didn't think there were gay or straight peadophiles. Just peadophiles. The assulating of a boy by a man does not necessarily mean he gay, and in most cases is just a power play, or some psychological problem rather then a natural occurance of being gay. :shrug:

btw, read back through this and what an extrememly interesting thread. I enjoyed both sides of the discussion.
 
i did read the entire thread before posting and yes pedophiles are both straight and gay.

the song in question was about attempted gay pedophilia in which one of the participants wasn't participating; not wilfully anyway.

dbs
 
Boy is about growing up in (a place like) Dublin

it's a bout mothers, sons, friends, gays, people going insane
the works really
 
You know what bugs me about threads like these? It starts off very well. People sharing thoughts and ideas; good ones at that often. I love to read them. But what kills it for me is this. It becomes Christians vs. Homosexuals. It's not this person vs. that person. What I mean is we seem to forget that the other post is actually done by a person!

To me, as a Christian, I kind of hold my head in shame. I always thought what I was taught was to love one another. I never heard it said in the Bible or in Church or wherever to..."love one another, except..." Likewise, on the other side of the coin, do you really think you're going to change someone's mind with attack or ridicule? Probably not I would think.

Forgive me if I offend anyone with this post. I just hate seeing important topics turn towards anger and hate.

I'll go on my soapbox now. Sorry to bother.
 
oy, this thread.

well, the "old man" wouldn't have been a pedophile, even if the Bono in the song was under 18 (he was 20 when Boy was released anyway) and "old man" doesn't mean a 55 year old, it could have been someone in his 20's or 30's who would seem like an old man to a teenager, and that would make the guy, at worst, a pederast not a pedophile. and Britney Spears' entire career was built upon pederasty (grown men who want to have sex with teenage girls), so it's not at all uncommon for older men to be attracted to teenaged boys if they're gay or teenaged girls if they're straight.

pedophilia, however, is an orientation apart from homo or heterosexuality. most men who are attracted to young boys don't identify as gay, and are turned on by the feminine appearance of pre-pubescent boys and are turned off by masculine, mature men with body hair and the works.

so ... just want to add some background.

as for Bono, he's said that he knew gay people growing up, and the Virgin Prunes were often in drag, and they talk about gay people going to their early gigs ("we just thougth they were rich punks"), and U2 has always, always had a large gay following because they're not heterosexist like, say, The Stones.

so ... yes, there's loads to be read into Boy if we are to do a queer reading.

which we tried to do.

but some people think that a Queer Reading is analagous to, "let's make everything about me. when i lose my keys, and i look for them, then, gosh, I STILL HAVEN'T FOUND WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR!"

when it's so much more than that. so much.

and, yes, i'm also saddened at the "gays v. Christians" that anything to do with homosexuality often devolves into, but so long as mainstream conservative Christianity feels it must make homophobia as the centerpiece of it's social policy agenda, then how surprised are we going to be?
 
This thread never devoloved in Christians Vs. Gays.

It devolved into bullies, who happen to be gay, verses people who stumbled on the thread and made the mistake of thinking that they could have an adult conversation with them.

And all the bullies wanted was someone to take out their anger on, even though no one on this thread at any time gave them a reason.

I assume you're planning on taking my lunch money next?
 
Niceman is mostly correct.

I've been listening to U2 longer than the some posters have claim to be gay.

:wink:

dbs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
A Boy Falls From the Sky is some U2's best work
Replies
3
Views
2K
zoocarolina
Z
R
Help a MacPhisto out! - Night #2 (9/30) at the Sphere (pics and videos)
Replies
3
Views
747
Ralph_Sutter
R
dan_smee
New Album Discussion 1 - Songs of..... - Unreasonable guitar album
60 61 62
Replies
2K
Views
102K
Achtung Ya'll
A
Z
Hello!
Replies
3
Views
824
zoo skis
Z
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Locked
Songs of Songs, Books & Fat Puns - New Album Discussion #8
33 34 35
Replies
1K
Views
53K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom