Burlesque is it grotesque?

[claig]

Very sad state of affairs, burlesque becoming mainstream

Burlesque it's just grotesque

'It wouldn't surprise me'

'They may intend'

Own up - you actually write for the DM, don't you?

There's no substance to any of this; you've read a rather snide tabloid article about something you know bugger all about & worked yourself into a lather over it.

I don't fully agree with dittany or tethers on the subject of burlesque, but I can respect both their views as informed.

I struggle to do so with your extrapolations, tbh.

I haven't, no - it's never been something I've sought out!

(I'm more likely to be watching dh displaying much of his bum on the stage at the other end of the hall, as he tries to get someone else's amp to talk to his guitar...)

At the most recent event where I saw burlesque performers & goth bands, filming was rather frowned on as inappropriate.

But I daresay if you google, some ignorant bugger will have uploaded stuff.

Oh my! Is this another sad meedja attempt to make us slate the choices of other females, just because they're a bit risque?

I don't write for the Daily Mail, that would be an honour I don't deserve. I admit that I don't know as much about burlesque as you do, unlike you I am not a fan and don't know about the 'scene'.

I have watched some burlesque on youtube for 50s music and I think it is demeaning and panders to men. I like 50s music but I think that type of burlesque is pathetic. I don't like goth music but I was interested to see if that burlesque pandered to men in the same way as the 50s ones do.

Then maybe you should do a bit more research. I would. Even in my very limited experience, what my granda was talking about was over 80 years old.

So go to it Claig. Research before you make up your mind and start inflammatory posts on'tinternet..

vesuvia made an excellent point

'These women were performing long before second wave feminism. Sexual objectification of women was not challenged in those days. It is depressing for a feminist to think that we are returning to such times.'

this stuff goes right back to the 50s with performers like Bettie Page.

I'm not a fan.

I'm quite neutral, really. I wouldn't be at all fussed if it disappeared, but equally, I don't agree with a blanklet dismissal of it whereby it's a subgenre of stripping, & stripping's all the same.

I have come across it as part of goth nights in the last 3-4 years. My impression is that some of it's clever/funny/entertaining; some of it's actually quite erotic; & some of it's a bit boring.

The atmosphere in the audience is very different to the atmosphere in a pub when someone's stag do/hen do stripper shows up; it's celebratory, not predatory.

It's all in the context.

I appreciate that there are other posters, whose views I respect, who will completely disagree, but I'm sticking to my guns here.

Is questioning burlesque inflammatory? Have we gone back to the future? Has burlesque become so mainstream that criticising it is inflammatory?

Erm, is anyone saying that questioning Burlesque is inflammatory? It's just that before questioning it, one should really do the research. And it is quite a history to research.

Try researching it Claig and then you can make up your own mind on whether it is grotesque or not.

I think that what was mentioned in the article is pretty grotesque. My mind is made up. Men paying to eat steak while watching women perform titillating acts for them is sad in my opinion.

If you make up your mind upon reading an article, that's your business. And your right. Go forward. Read whatever article is in front of you and make up your mind. You can do that. It is your right. But it doesn't make you right.

Yes, I agree.

It sounds quite dreadful (& absolutely the sort of 'burlesque' night the DM would be advertising condemning.)

You can't form an intelligent opinion on the basis of a sneery misogynist article, the thrust of which was 'look at this, it's pervy & disgusting' - accompanied by pictures so the reader can drool a bit over its pervy disgustingness.

Burlesque may or may not be grotesque. The attitude of the DM's hack certainly is.

Instead of allowing the DM to make your mind up, you could always try a spot of research - someone else mentioned some well-known performers. You could at least google before you allow the DM total control of your brain.

I did subsequently google on youtube, but not for those performers. I don't like it.

I am confused. While youtube is a current source of some information, I would take more care when forming an opinion. Are you so stupid uninformed as to base your opinion on a Daily Mail article and not follow the leads given here and actual history of a subject before you make up your mind?

Are you so stupid to think that Daily Mail articles aren't true and that their journalists make stories up? The Daily Mail is a different animal to the Guardian.

'Are you so stupid uninformed as to base your opinion on a Daily Mail article'

Stupid enough not to know her Daily Mail from her Daily Quail, apparently!

Although I'm leaning towards it being all a nice seasonal wind up.

No, I am not so stupid as to make my mind up on the basis on one/any number of article(s) that has(have) appeared in any publication. I tend to explore any strong reactions within myself with as much research as I can be bothered to do. When I can't be bothered to do the research I remain ambivalent.

Unlike you.

But as I said Claig, that is your right. Read an article. Believe it. Knock yerself out.

Personally I have always found that the Daily Quail contains more facts than the Guardian.

Good night.

Did you discover this through research?[hahahaha emoticon]

I know it's poor form to reference another thread.

But the OP apparently believes that this august organ is a citable source for her asrgument that Christmas is in imminent danger of being overwhelmed by Winterval.

I'm inclined to take her opinions less than seriously as a result. Call me picky...

Very poor form and somewhat smacking of desperation. Good night.

Despair, more than desperation - I've just engaged in a debate with someone who a) takes the Daily Mail seriously & b) is equally happy to reference a satirical blog which describes the DM as 'one particularly rotten ship putrefying in a sea of gradually sinking Titanics of hate'.

Without apparently being to distinguish between them, except as 'not the guardian'.

That's an hour of my life I'm never going to get back!

'Could someone point out exactly what in the article is incorrect about burlesque performances by women stripping. Because I don't think there is anything there that is incorrect.'

Thanks dittany. That is the key question.

The Daily Quail stuff is slightly off topic from the burlesque article.

The Daily Quail is one of these many spoof Daily Mail websites, and I did bring up one of its articles to support my case on another thread. I did so jokingly, suspecting that ravenAK would believe it was serious, which she duly did.

I still maintain that the Daily Quail is more evidence-based than the Guardian. It is true that the Daily Quail describes the Daily Mail as 'one particularly rotten ship putrefying in a sea of gradually sinking Titanics of hate'. But I never claimed that the Daily Quail was right on everything.