Neurotic Visionary with Delusional Aspirations. 08/20/1995. Male. Canada. Or am I?



December 6th 2013 11:57 PM  |  4 notes

I don’t listen to an eclectic or up to date selection of music to make a judgement about the Grammy nominations… But fuck everyone who was involved in the decision of nominating Blurred Lines.

And Roar is a completely rehashed, unoriginal, forgettable record… Like how…

I’m so glad I focus more on film because as frustrating as the Academy Awards (and the film industry, as a representation and political realm is still very problematic) can be from time to time, at least all the films that are nominated usually still have a high degree of merit. The Grammys is the most brain wracking and headache inducing ceremony, whereby artists are often just awarded based on popularity and sales.

…I mean Bad Romance and Born This Way were never even considered, and those are unarguably her most progressive and groundbreaking tracks. But as Gaga says, she does what she loves and that’s what keeps her strong. So I’ll focus on what I love most, which is film (and her).

November 14th 2013 5:29 PM  |  122 notes  |  Via


gaga stays going against the grain.

while you have artists like katy, taylor, and lily allen claiming they don’t use their body to sell, here’s gaga with dwuw saying she does use her body to sell and she does so because that’s all people deserve. everyone is putting so much emphasis on the body as if it’s some sacred object (slut shaming imo) while gaga is emphasizing that it’s the heart and mind that actually matter. you can show your ass on your single cover and you can run around half naked all you want, because what matters at the end of the day is why you’re doing what you’re doing and how it makes you feel.

but let’s ignore that b/c it’s gaga and she’s HORRIBLE

Men can use their bodies however they want and nobody pays any mind to whether its sexual or marketable. Case in point: Justin Bieber walks around shirtless and nobody mentions, or even has a single thought about how he is ‘marketing’ himself or implicating his sales. He may be mocked and told to find his missing shirt, but it’s not out of slut shaming or of a sexual nature. He’s nowhere near being vilified for supposedly arousing girls, where as, vice versa, women are accused of that all the time. 

While Lily’s central message is still very true—it’s hard out here for a bitch—the constant attacking of women by each other in the industry is counterintuitive and arguably regressive. And if anything, it’s become trite in pop music. 

The beauty of Do What U Want is it addresses the commodity of the body without having to argue that any one kind of person/pop star is perceiving the ‘sanctity’ of their body in the wrong way, but rather placing the blame on the ones who truly deserve it: the media. Placing the blame on the public discourse that continues to demonize female genitalia as weapons of mass destruction or wickedly alluring poisonous fruit. 

There’s also no exclusivity to Gaga’s message. You can do whatever you want with my body, because my control of my sexuality and intellect presides in my mind and my heart, not on my body, which you try to desexualize or hyper-sexualize for your own pleasure.

November 8th 2013 11:44 AM  |  11 notes

I’m tired of hearing sex being ‘shocking’. Maybe it’s cause I’m 18, or because I’ve been desensitized to the supposedly ‘shocking’ nature of sex and sexuality, but there’s honestly nothing that shocks me about the expression or depiction of sex in art and culture. 

Singing about sex, or showing sex on film, in particular lesbian sex, isn’t a shock tactic nor is it a cliche. Why can’t our sex just be an inherent expression of sex itself, rather than specifically of a certain kind of sex? It doesn’t make any sense to me that people view lesbian sex as more of a gimmick than any other kind of sex. 

(If you couldn’t tell, I’m referring to the criticism behind Sexxx Dreams, and Blue is the Warmest Colour, in which the latter I finally get to see tonight!) 

November 5th 2013 1:45 AM  |  3 notes

It’s futile for me to remain unstimulated and bored by the work I do. If I don’t like the work I’m arduously suffering through, there are always other opportunities for me to fulfill other passions, outside of school. I’m always too afraid, or too idle. 

University of Toronto has a Rapid Launch program that will teach entrepreneurs how to flourish in their businesses, and the requirement to enrol is to upload a 15 second proposal of your own business… of which I have none. 

I have to think of something before November 11 (and have the conviction to follow through on it).

October 15th 2013 1:47 AM  |  38 notes

My interpretation of G.U.Y.

So it might seem premature to have already analyzed a few lines of lyric, but the duality of the acronym can’t be ignored—nor do I want to put off my thoughts for later.

Love me, love me/ Please retreat (tentative)/ Let me be the girl under you that makes you cry/ I wanna be that G.U.Y.

G.U.Y. is about empowering women to be the agents of sexualization and to reverse the roles of male dominance and female submission. Let me be the girl under you that makes you cry. While men have historically had the social norm of ‘popping a girl’s cherry,’ ‘de-virginizing’ or ‘de-flowering’ a women of her virginity, a women isn’t seen as having that same power. G.U.Y. is a statement that a woman can have just as much sexual prowess and be in control of a man’s sexuality, as much as the patriarchy has asserted it’s oppression and dominance over women’s sexuality. It’s apparent in the way she phrases her position: that she’s the GIRL UNDER YOU, the G.U.Y., and embodying what is typically seen as the masculine role, rather than the feminine role, but which alludes to the futility and meaninglessness of those gender boundaries. 

Some might argue that whatever I’ve just said is reading into this a bit too much (some of us just like to read), but you have to understand that it’s the minor oddities that trigger an analysis in Gaga’s work. If you think about it, her lyrics can be quite superficial or cliche at times, but if she sings, let me be the girl under you that makes you cry, you have to ponder, why the fuck does she want to make the man she’s fucking cry? And additionally, the male/female binary in the acronym G.U.Y. is not coincidental. 

Whenever people rant about how so and so is never analyzed, or that so and so had implicit meanings in his/her new track and yet nobody bothered to look into it, you have to realize that Gaga proclaimed herself to be an artist and demanded people to deconstruct her work. It certainly doesn’t negate whatever meanings other artists have begun to infuse into their work, but Gaga, from the very beginning has layered her work with artistic expression, so that even if she doesn’t implement it consciously, her devoted audience will now create something for her.

The Fame was incredibly superficial and entertaining for the sake of alluring the public, and there was little if at all any implications to her music. The Fame Monster was an extremely personal record that had meanings, but they were fairly accessible and explicit in its themes (fear of death, fear of love, fear of alcohol, etc.). Born This Way was the album with the strongest underlying messages (Scheiße, Americano, Marry The Night, Judas), but also the most misunderstood. It was inaccessible in its imagery, sound, and lyricism, and because of that, it was even more difficult to get at the core of the album’s true meaning. Even Born This Way, the most literal and emphatic pop song, became obscured by an argument of nature versus nurture (whether people were born/become gay, or born/become disabled, or born/become whatever). The track is about being destined to be who you are, and regardless of the way you were actually born, you were born/destined to be the best person you can be, and to overcome the adversities that become a part of the trajectory of your life. You were born to be brave. You were born this way. But this is an old rant that has its post already.

ARTPOP now feels like a rebirth of old sounds, new sounds, and an incendiary amalgamation of everything she’s done and wants to pursue—sonically, lyrically, and visually. With what she’s released so far ARTPOP is shaping up to be a truly diverse sound, and a return to perfect pop artistry for Gaga. One second I’m a Koons, then suddenly the Koons is me.

August 27th 2013 12:43 AM  |  2 notes
I hate society so much, it makes me sick.

It’s gone beyond the point of sickening for me; it’s just that people’s arguments have become so vapid and inane and so repetitive. I have absolutely no problem with people questioning a women and her decisions, but certainly not when it’s just a woman deciding to be nothing less than human. That is fucking archaic, ignorant, and not to mention absolutely boring hackneyed journalism. Everyone keeps rambling on about the same mindless criticisms on women (and maybe that comes from recently reading a whole lot more on my part). It’s… tiring, especially living with three women and being empowered by femininity in my own life. 

August 19th 2013 11:51 AM  |  20 notes

I love the fact that Gaga’s work is always personal, and in a vain way, always about herself and her perspective and artistry (because truthfully, whose art isn’t?). She emulates everything and everyone, so the imagery tricks audiences into thinking she’s just another vapid pop star, but if you look closely, the references aren’t all that obscure. There are so many self-referential moments in Applause (brunette Gaga as her past self writhing on the mattress, caged Gaga in her AMAs Bad Romance outfit, The Fame choreography with the hands) because the video is, once again, a reflection of who she was and who she’s becoming; in amalgamating all these pop cultural icons, somewhere in the video she’s becoming herself, as a simulacrum of pop culture: ARTPOP. 

I think that’s a really simplified explanation of the video and is in no way ‘digging for a deep meaning’ at all, and rather superficial. Some people think she’s narcissistic; I think she’s reflective and retrospective, in a way that can be entertaining, provocative, and beautiful.

April 28th 2013 2:28 AM  |  2 notes

I miss Gaga so much. She is the single drive in my distressing and monotonous life who inspires me to live creatively and makes me happy no matter what, even if only for a few minutes. With every photograph, record, outfit, and video, she makes me excited for the future: life as an art, life as an innovation, life as a compassionate being, life as an endless fashion, and life as an illusion without artifice, can be genuine. I can be whoever I want to be with boundless possibilities. She invigorates pop culture with her mere presence—she invigorates me—and without her, I’m simply trudging through my senior year with absolutely no will and a constant grimace on my tired face. School is complete and utter shitpissfuckass nonetheless, but her absence makes all this fuckingfuckholedickcuntbitchfuck even all the more insufferable. I miss her so much. I just need my escapism back.

February 28th 2013 12:09 AM  |  978 notes  |  Via


One of the most asinine arguments used against Gaga is the “Lady Gaga thinks she represents gay people” argument. This is an argument founded on the belief that Gaga thinks she is “teh leader of teh gayz” because she stands up and speaks out against inequality. No, this argument is not based on Gaga’s own philosophies, rather on the destructive and self-deprecating idea that anyone who dares stand up for your rights is a “pretentious try hard exploiting the less fortunate”. Unfortunately, this idea is heralded by many non-Gaga fans who feel Lady Gaga has no right standing up for, well, what is right.

The biggest problem with this argument, apart from the fact that it makes no sense, is that it is often used by people who know nothing about Gaga and the connection she has with her fans, most of whom are gay. Over the past five years, Gaga has met with thousands and thousands of young LGBT boys and girls who have told them about their struggles as a queer person, and as someone who views the relationship with their fans as symbiotic, Gaga feels compelled to speak out in their defense. What people don’t understand is that Lady Gaga only represents those who want her to represent them. Maybe you don’t want to be represented by Gaga because you don’t need to be, or maybe you just don’t like her. Great, that is your choice, but guess what, not everyone is the same. Many young LGBT boys and girls gravitate towards Gaga because they need a voice, because they need someone to represent them, and that too is great.

Above is a great video that hasn’t been seen by very many where Gaga addresses the very argument explained above. No, Lady Gaga does not see herself as “the voice”, she sees herself as “a voice” for herself and those who need her, and as a voice, she is doing her part to make the world/her country a better place for those who are not afforded the same opportunities as she.

Does that make her pretentious? No, it makes it her a good fucking person.

If she were not a celebrity, if she were not an artist, and most of all if she weren’t earning a single damn fucking penny from any fucking person, then her words, I truly believe, would be understood for its genuineness and the boundless love it perpetuates and inspires. But because she is a musician who has a loving fan base and happens to earn fucking profit from them, she is exploitive. She is pretentious. She is a good fucking liar who has young people wrapped in her warped and dangerous ideals. She is the devil. She is the bitch who’s trying to champion for a community who didn’t fucking ask for her and doesn’t need her and god fucking damn her, she’s not even in the fucking same community. 

In the celebrity world the public is quick to be vicious and cynical and malicious and completely fucking tear down anyone who doesn’t seem quite right. There is no possible way she could be real. Nobody really loves everyone, nobody really wants to stand up for equality, because it would be too tiring. You say you stand up for one person, but then how do you discern who is right or wrong? Will you stand up for sex fetishes that can be borderline abusive, or who’s recreational choice of drug is lethal, or who’s religion has the right to murder, or who’s nation has the right to censorship? Who do we stand up for? And so how dare she say she’ll stand up for us FUCKING GAYS?

Let’s get this straight, freedom can not be reduced to a single denominator. When you stand up for any person’s right, you are standing up for the progressive equality of everyone, whether you like it or not, in the scheme of humanity, a step forward in equality is a step forward for everyone. That is my naive hope. And when people want to separate between who can stand up for whom, well then you’ve missed the fucking point.

If I had a voice and the influential power to stand up for the people I love, I’d be damned if anyone tried to stop me. Wouldn’t you?

September 8th 2012 10:37 PM  |  1 note



SO NOW MY LEFT ARM SMELLS LIKE FAME AND MY RIGHT ARM SMELLS LIKE SPICEBOMB. ALKmalskdcmlskdcnlsdkcmlsakdmlakemflkmcalkmc multiple olfactory orgasms just all day long ughhhhhhhhhh. The more I smell Fame, the less sweet and generic it seems than when I first experienced it. I can really smell more of the incense and the tinge of ‘darkness’ that makes it much more addictive than any regular fruity or floral fragrance. AND SPICEBOMB IS SIMPLY IRRESISTIBILE AND MUSKY, I REALLY CAN NOT STOP SMELLING MYSELF.

AND I got V 78 THE YOUTH QUAKE ISSUE, which was supposed to go off sale 08/30, WHICH IT DIDN’T ANNNNDDDD IT’S THE GIVENCHY COVER WHICH IS DA ABSOLUTE BESTEST SHIT AHHHHHHH asdlkfmalsdkcmlawekfjewimdsakm 


THIS EXISTS. It’s a collection of photographs shot by Mario Testino selected from his exhibition in Beijing, China, which ran from June 6 - 27, and features bilingual passages written by Graydon Carter, Jennifer Allen, and Patrick Kinmonth. I saw it at the bookstore and it features a stunning lenticular cover of a very tan Gaga shot for her very first V Magazine cover back in Fall 2009. Granted, it’s $69.99. I ALSO SAW A TON OF OTHER BOOKS ON CONTEMPORARY AND MODERN ARTISTS (by Taschen, they’ve got phenomenal book series and collections, I have their set for 100 Contemporary Fashion Designers MUHAHAHA) AND UGHHHHHHH JUST SO MANY EMOTIONS AND I WISH I COULD JUST READ THEM ALLLLLLL.