Red Mosquito

durdencommatyler wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:I totally agree with what LV is saying about Miley's persona and why what she's doing is actually important and fascinating and culturally relevant.

But, I also agree with Strat that the music is terrible. So I have no problem with Miley being Miley, in fact, I encourage it. But I'm still not going to listen to her music.

I agree with L_V too on Miley. Except for I really don't like most of her music either. Really, The Climb and Party In The USA, but those are pre-all growed up.

I hate how much I like Party in the USA. But, if I'm honest.... yeah, I dig that one. But GOD I hate that chorus.

"Party in the USA" is ridiculously good. It's a pretty perfect pop song.

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:whatever happened to Paula Cole?

She is probably out looking for cowboys.

I wish the New Radicals made more than the one album.

she was kind of a second rate Alannis.

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

BurtReynolds wrote:

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:whatever happened to Paula Cole?

She is probably out looking for cowboys.

I wish the New Radicals made more than the one album.

she was kind of a second rate Alannis.

With hairy pits IIRC.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I guess this is an unpopular opinion: I think the last two Flaming Lips albums are their best by a large margin.

Good yes. Not sure if they compare to The Soft Bulletin or Yoshimi but I dig them.

Is their stage show still the same as it was like 10 years ago?

bodysnatcher wrote:

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I guess this is an unpopular opinion: I think the last two Flaming Lips albums are their best by a large margin.

Good yes. Not sure if they compare to The Soft Bulletin or Yoshimi but I dig them.

Is their stage show still the same as it was like 10 years ago?

I can't speak for 10 years ago but I saw them like 3-4 years ago and they were awesome. I have heard they are either great or garbage live. Usually no in-between.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

bodysnatcher wrote:

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I guess this is an unpopular opinion: I think the last two Flaming Lips albums are their best by a large margin.

Good yes. Not sure if they compare to The Soft Bulletin or Yoshimi but I dig them.

Is their stage show still the same as it was like 10 years ago?

I can't speak for 10 years ago but I saw them like 3-4 years ago and they were awesome. I have heard they are either great or garbage live. Usually no in-between.

10 years was a bit of an exaggeration. But I did seem them 3 times within a span of about 8 years, and their stage show was pretty much the same every time. I get it, it fits their brand well, but after a couple of times it wears off and the tunes need to do the heavy lifting.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

Maybe I just care too much, Burt.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

Maybe I just care too much, Burt.

Maybe I just don't care enough.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

Maybe I just care too much, Burt.

Maybe I just don't care enough.

hipsters really care what Miley does.

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

Maybe I just care too much, Burt.

Maybe I just don't care enough.

hipsters really care what Miley does.

what microbrew goes best with Wrecking Ball?

BurtReynolds wrote:

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How is it fascinating or culturally relevant? Its been done repeatedly for decades. No one cares. It doesn't move any needles. She's just the latest in a long line of clones.

Not to mention she takes the idea of empowerment and uses that power to create something truly ugly and selfish. There isn't anything noble about her.

No, you don't care. It's objectively false to say no one does. And I think she's absolutely making a positive impact. One could argue that she is simply a part of an inevitable generational shift, but her part is very visible, and she is completely unapologetic about playing that part. Whether or not you find that part interesting or worthwhile is totally subjective, of course. But you're on record as not really caring about society, so it makes sense that you wouldn't.

she's part of an inevitable generational regurgitation. The fact that she's unapologetic about just makes her more pathetic. No one cares that her act is "racy". It's utterly expected. Your opinion that its "absolutely making a positive impact" is no more objective than mine, so don't bring that subjective/objective shit in this HOUSE!

Which is why I preceded it with "I think." Of course the positivity or negativity of her impact, whatever it may be, is subjective.

I don't think "regurgitation" is accurate, because while the broad idea may be similar with each generation, the level and specificity of it is a progression. I don't really look at culture in terms of sweeping generalizations about things being cyclical and all that; specificity is important.

How does that tanslate into something admirable or interesting when you could plug in almost anyone to fill that roll? She is completely interchangeable with any number of similar acts. The only difference is she has a larger marketing/money/production backing. She isn't leading anything, she is the end result of what the machine is putting out. This isn't progress.

and I was literally being literal when I said no one cares, like literally. I'm sure TMZ watchers are very invested in her every boring move. edit: that doesn't mean she's leading some kind of cultural revolution.

I don't see us reaching common ground on this one if you honestly think that.

of course we won't! We are utterly incomprehensible to each other! All that is left is a total war of complete annihilation. Or I'm gonna go play some vidya games.

Maybe I just care too much, Burt.

Maybe I just don't care enough.

hipsters really care what Miley does.

what microbrew goes best with Wrecking Ball?

Budweiser.

Just put on the new Carly Rae Jepsen album.

And quickly turned it off three songs in.

Is there supposed to be a new chvrches album out soon or something? Where is it?