Christine and the Queens - at Glastonbury

She is a fascinating and truly original artist. The Bowie comparison is a very good one. I agree, she's definitely more of a performance artist than anything else now, although her music and accompanying videos, the earlier stuff particularly, are pop of the most sublime kind.

I do roll my eyes at the fact that she's using gender-identity stuff to express herself. Being charitable, you could say she's just using the current thinking/vocabulary, the way we all change the way we speak/think/add to the social conversation over time.
I suspect if she was calling herself a man, wanting to go topless etc in a time when this topic was less pervasive/inflammatory, I wouldn't be eye-rolling but would see it as just a part of her expressing herself and exploring as an artist. Although I guess she wouldn't be expressing herself in this way if this stuff WASN'T so pervasive at the moment...

And I like that she seems to be rejecting, or at least taking a critical view of, surgery, hormones and stereotyped things like short hair.

Thanks RealityFan appreciate that insight. Food for thought.

It's all so overcomplicated, though. It is not a natural way of seeing or processing the world - how could trying to deliberately mentally override everything your senses are telling you ever be?

Shedding personas who even had time in their busy life to ponder such nonsense?

Gender ideology is such a middle class privilege.

The reality is tho, is that sexism will start to affect them. Just like it always has. Scales start to fall as women become vulnerable due to childbirth and misplaced reliance on equality.

It's unavoidable.

I don't experience gender because there no such actual thing. Lol

Hey, the truth doesn't matter if the fantasy fits.

They also think sex work is work, so there's that too.

They see feminism as having reached its zenith with females able to have kids whenever they like, often not at all. Parity on pay, or getting there. Total freedom/access to the pill, abortion on demand, sex work, porn.

They may think that, but in reality:

able to have kids whenever they like, often not at all. Still considerable social judgement either way, and many social and career consequences that don't land (or not as hard) on men.

Parity on pay, or getting there. Haven't got there, still a long way to go.

Total freedom/access to the pill, But only a pill for women, unequal burden of contraception, many forms still heavily gatekept.

abortion on demand Not the case in the UK, very definitely not in the US.

I think you’ll find that there are some female transitioners who have their nipples removed during their double mastectomies. Dr Gallagher certainly offers it as an option. It looks really odd but some prefer the blank canvas look. I guess it’s more ‘non-binary’ to have a nipple-less chest (even though both sexes have them?)

Anyway I’m not a fan of Christine and the Queens’ music although admire their obvious talent. Always seemed terribly pretentious and po-faced and theatre-school. Give me PJ Harvey any day - raw, pure poetic talent, guts and phenomenal musicality. I didn’t see CATQ’s performance at Glasto but I will go and watch and report back if I feel any differently. I’m always prepared to listen without prejudice and change my mind.

Can we just have a NO FUCKING NIPPLES PLEASE! policy. Men, NB, women, trans, alien invaders etc.

I'm lost now about the BBC guidance - so a bloke can have his nipples on display but a woman cannot. What about a trans man or trans woman - if I identify as a man can I go on TV and display my nipples but if my husband identifies as a woman he can no longer show them?!?

I first noticed him a few years ago when he was still a “she” and found her quite mesmerising.

saw a clip the other night but was quite taken aback with the toplessness so changed channels again quickly- dc
were in the room and I wasn’t up for questions at the time

I will check out the whole set on iplayer now though if people think it’s worth it.

Gen Z are going to graduate in the degrees that lead to jobs in politics, the law, medicine, arts, social sciences, STEM/engineering.

Policies we profoundly disagree with will be promulgated as Gen Z entrench.

And unlike all other generations, the current crop of young people will become more Left, less conservative as they get older.

I don't think the Tories realise how existential is the threat of their total wipeout, and how they won't have a voter base to recover in 2028 or beyond.

Too late. Gen Z plus frustrated Gen X and Millennials will ensure a three term Labour govt, and we'll have Gender Self ID, trans conversion ban, and draconian Irish style anti hate speech legislation.

Finally, the govt of UK will be in lockstep with institutional capture of British sectors like unions, arts, medicine, social services, education and civil service.

While we're on Glastonbury, what did we make of Lizzo and her celebration of womanhood? Or is that not cool? And Elton John — who's always been fond of glitter and feathers and other 'girlie' stuff: check out his 1984 full frock:

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/photos-elton-johns-outfits-through-the-years-20212/1984-12-174996/

I can see the appeal, too. It's if it's a fashion, or a mindset.

Or even something more profound than that.

The problem is, that people are building laws around it. Laws that restrict and limit women and subject them to male predation.

Hence I find the demand to accept one's 'inner glow' as profoundly selfish, instead of progressive and interesting.

The I'm alright Jack, because my inner glow makes me look good on stage, whereas it subjects you to a rapist in your cell, attitude, is unbelievably self centred.

I agree. And then at some point some of them will have a child and suddenly their eyes will open and they'll see how the world really works...

I believe that we should be more open minded about how men and women can present themselves to the world rather than suggesting clothes etc should determine your gender,

I assume you simply didn't think how incredibly patronising your statement is to many here? I (and I'm guessing quite a few of us on this thread) grew up make-up free in dungarees and Doc Martens while our male counterparts wore eyeliner and glitter and had longer hair than us. We grew up with David Bowie and Marc Bolan and Mick Jagger in frocks and lace doing their gender-bending thing while still happily male. We had women like Annie Lennox and Souixie Soux for role models. We challenged the expectations that women should look nice and demonstrate our femininity in skirts. It's not about clothes or presentation.

What Heloise/ Christine/ Redcar is up to isn't just dressing up, it's tinkering with the way her fabulous female body works and rejecting her womanhood — and because of her public profile, she's inevitably going to encourage other distressed young women down that path.

Learning to be happy in your own skin can be a real challenge but brings the biggest rewards. Fighting sexual stereotyping is a great way of building self-esteem and understanding of the patriarchal, political systems that keep women in their place. Succumbing to patriarchy by rejecting your female body and the whole concept of 'woman' isn't feminist and is profoundly damaging.

Riddles wrapped in enigmas, boxed in conundrums.

Let's just imagine the Gen Z mindset here, especially from girls/young women who would rather be dead than associate on MN.

They see feminism as having reached its zenith with females able to have kids whenever they like, often not at all. Parity on pay, or getting there. Total freedom/access to the pill, abortion on demand, sex work, porn.

For them, there is so much parity, that women and men are interchangeable, almost like uniforms. To the point where one can change multiple times a day or depending on mood. I've seen the Tik Tok videos.

So for large swathes (the majority?) of 16-25 females, maybe even into their 30s, male and female are literally "moods" or "mindsets", not set by biology or other areas of hard reality.

For them, they see feminism as getting the vote (first wave), getting autonomy (second wave), getting the choice to be...or not be...female (unicorn wave).

And this is then extended to males. Because biology doesn't matter, and it's feelings, female, and male, are matters of inner glow, and outward presentation to match that glow.

Thus artists like this one at Glasto fit the new paradigm.

And anyone stepping on this feelings/inner glow/outward presentation/lived experience model of gender/sexuality is transphobic and an enemy.

Any opposition to the new theory is attacking individuals, and the group will not allow that. And in the new paradigm, free speech is not sacrosanct, because the authentic self is all that matters, and that cant be interogated by skepticism, and can only be known to the individual.

Despite being as GC as the rest of us here, I can absolutely see the appeal, the circular logic, and how it's a worldview and personal belief that you would absolutely fight for, and view any dissent as phobic.

Having said that I do think it's a relative positive to have someone prominent calling themselves a transman who talks publicly about hormones and surgery being unnecessary.

I agree with your post Chatter and see what you mean but ultimately, what suddenly makes Chris a 'man' and why do we all have to say we believe Chris is one?

I really don't mean to be goady or want to disrespect how Chris feels/identifies, it's obviously all very personal, but to have to use male pronouns is just a pretence (vice versa with a certain Izzard).

Chris is a brilliant performer and a complex artist, and is captivatingly beautiful but why anyone has to advance gender non-conformity to having us all pretend they're a different sex is a square I personally cannot circle. Yet many people go along with it all without question. It seems so odd to me.

If you turned on Glasto and had no idea who Chris was, would anyone really genuinely say they were watching a man? What does Chris, or anyone projecting similar, really expect from people who are not aware?

If Christine is a TM then surely their nipples don't need to be covered up?

I think it’s a shame when women want to identify as men (but not go through a sex change). What’s wrong with being a woman, in whatever form of feminine that is (be it floaty dresses and long hair or cropped hair and ‘bovver’ boots or whatever you want it to be). It sometimes feels like being a woman isn’t good enough and being a man is better. Not meaning to offend anyone it’s just what I wonder sometimes.

If she's not denying she's a woman why is she referred to as 'he'?

Same with David Bowie, Marc Bolan, Grace Jones, countless others, none living lives according to sex stereotypes or dressing or looking stereotypical but they didnt feel the need to have names or be regressive , they just 'were' themselves.

According to you their friend/partner Ocean has.
I didn’t say Christine has I said A woman