t.A.T.u.

Want to share your enthusiasm for an artist or a band with other "My So-Called Life" fans? Post here. (Note: Please discuss the MSCL soundtrack in the "Show" forum)
User avatar
Natasha (candygirl)
MSCL.com Team
MSCL.com Team
Posts: 5374
Joined: Dec 7th 2001, 3:05 am
Location: California

t.A.T.u.

Post by Natasha (candygirl) » Feb 12th 2003, 2:45 pm

I have been hearing this song nonstop at work for a few weeks, but I just saw the vidoe for the first time over the weekend. My boyfriend and I both thought WTF?

There is an interesting article about it here - any thoughts on the underage lesbian girls making out in Catholic school uniforms in the rain?
Natasha aka candygirl :: MSCL.com

Look, if this is weird for you, being tutored? I don't mind helping you a little longer.
You could have sex with me if you really want to help...I guess that's a "no"?

User avatar
Megs
Lifehead
Posts: 1185
Joined: Jun 30th 2002, 11:35 am
Location: NOVA
Contact:

Post by Megs » Feb 12th 2003, 3:39 pm

All I can say is that brother loves that band, especially the video. I had no idea until just this past weekend, either. Very interesting.
"I have all these dreams where I know exactly what to say. And you tell me, you know, that you forgive me."

andrewgd
Liberty High Graduate
Posts: 676
Joined: Sep 11th 2002, 9:49 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by andrewgd » Feb 12th 2003, 3:42 pm

Its definitely uncomfortable. No doubt, they're hot. But they are underage. I think they started the group when they were 15 or 16, and are now 17. Which definitely poses a problem when they perform in wet tshirts and panties, and nothing else but kneepads.

So now is the quandry...hot psuedo-lesbians...underage...girls kissing...underage. I wouldn't have a problem if they were 18... which in itself may or may not be stupid (why should one year make a difference?).

I do think it is interesting to have a group's gimmick be the relationship. You don't see Justin and Britney forming their own group. I can't remember the last "couple" group there was...Sonny and Cher?

So, I guess its ok to find it hot, but you can't claim that they are, or you are a perv. Right? No? I dunno. :?
"Your imagination, like a child, will explode with unrestrained possibilities for adventure."

User avatar
mglenn
MSCL.com Team
MSCL.com Team
Posts: 552
Joined: May 25th 1999, 4:46 pm
Location: Butler, PA ( AKA: Three Rivers, PA )
Contact:

Post by mglenn » Feb 12th 2003, 3:47 pm

From one extreme to the other.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. I believe that kids know alot more about sex than parents want to believe but I also think that exposing them to such things when they are very young (under 12) is not really a good idea. After 12 its a losing battle to keep it from them.

But then the issue is that parents don't talk to their kids at all these days. (The stories my girlfriend tells me from grade school :shock: ) There are a whole slew of social issues that need dealt with, including:

Both Parents working to pay the taxes.
Kid is distracted alot? Put them on Riddelin!
Self Esteem is placed before learning. (Ex. if we make Johnny feel good about himself he'll learn, instead of if Johnny learns he will feel good about himself.)

So in closing... Look bright shiny object!!!

Now what was I saying... :P
"When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit." - Ayn Rand

User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Feb 12th 2003, 4:03 pm

I first learned about Tatu about 4 or 5 months ago. Saw a news piece on them and how they planned to market them in the US soon (as they are now). I was amazed with what I read, i had to go search down the video(s). I eventually found them and DLed the video that is now plastered all over Mtv and another concert footage video and some interview footage.

It wouldn't bother me at all except for the fact that they are underage (atleast here in the US) and it is so obviously a marketing ploy that it is just ridiculous. But really when it comes down to it they are doing the same thing that Britney and Christina did/are doing except doing it together :twisted: .

From what I have heard they are good at what they do (musically...perverts ;) ). It is not my cup of tea, but compared to some of the other crap out there this isn't that bad, except that it is on all the time.

I am normally not one for censorship of any kind but I am a little freaked out that they play this in the middle of the afternoon. I can't stop thinking that there is some 40 year old unemployed guy sitting on his couch beating off to it while across the street some 14 year old girl is dancing to it in her living room. It just conjures bad things, but I really can't take a censorship stance on it. That would go against all my principles.

That said, I am impressed that MTV didn't edit it at all (atleast from what I can remember seeing), granted it is a minor step in the right direction for MTV, they still have a LOOOOOONG way to go IMO.

User avatar
TomSpeed
Marshall Wannabe
Posts: 1226
Joined: Jan 13th 2003, 3:37 pm
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Contact:

Post by TomSpeed » Feb 12th 2003, 4:26 pm

Nice gimmick. Sex sells. Lipstick lesbians have become marketing tools. Girls who look sexy -- Britney, for example -- sell records as well. Throwing in Catholic school uniforms is a nice touch, too. I considered the uniforms sexy when I was growing up. The fact that the girls are under 18 and kissing onstage troubles me though. It seems a shame that they are being exploited in such a manner. Where are the girls' parents? My question is, "Can they sing?"

As for whether I personally find them hot -- I must admit I've had a fantasy or two about me and a couple of good looking women. They were older though.
TomSpeed

Patty: If Rayanne's not seeing you, and we're not seeing you, who is seeing you?
Graham: And how much of you?
Angela: Dad!
Graham: Oh, I'm sorry! I asked a question about your life, didn't I? Woah, what came over me?
http://www.last.fm/user/TomSpeed/

User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Feb 12th 2003, 4:35 pm

TomSpeed wrote: It seems a shame that they are being exploited in such a manner. Where are the girls' parents?
I am sure the parents are laughing their way to the bank.

User avatar
Natasha (candygirl)
MSCL.com Team
MSCL.com Team
Posts: 5374
Joined: Dec 7th 2001, 3:05 am
Location: California

Post by Natasha (candygirl) » Feb 12th 2003, 4:42 pm

fnordboy wrote:I am impressed that MTV didn't edit it at all (atleast from what I can remember seeing), granted it is a minor step in the right direction for MTV, they still have a LOOOOOONG way to go IMO.
One of the things that really annoys me about MTV is their hypocrisy - they claim to be advocates of free speech but they censor videos at their own discretion. Remember all the controversy surrounding "Justify Your Love"? They would only air it late at night and I think they ended up showing it only a few times at that. Funny that now they'll show the t.A.T.u. video or Christina Aguilera's "Dirrty" video. In retrospect, Madonna's videos seem pretty tame by today's standards. Is it the sexuality or the scantily clothed girls that MTV opposes? It's okay to show half naked kids if they're in a peppy sweaty video like "The Middle" by Jimmy Eat World or dancing in a rap video (as Pop Up Video pointed out, the girl dancing with Nelly - and I use dancing to mean "bending over in front of him and humping the air while rubbing her ass against his crotch" - in the "Hot in Herre" video was only 17 so that is considered underage in the US)?

MTV bleeps out words like "endo" in rap songs, but it's okay for Sheryl Crow to sing "I still get stoned." They blur out brand names shown on clothing (Real World, etc) because it's wrong to give free advertising to these companies, but when the companies are willing to pay (as in sponsor prizes on Road Rules) we'll show your logo incessantly!

I realize that at the end of the day, MTV is a business and money is their bottom line, but it bugs the crap outta me that they claim to be free speech advocates and all kinds of other stuff when in reality they are stomping on freedom of expression as much as people who ban books.

Yes, there is a line that should be drawn which is why shows like NYPD Blue are shown at 10pm. MTV knows that their audience is young and there is some moral obligation not to glorify particular things or expose middle school kids to videos that show drinking, smoking, and sex in the middle of the afternoon but MTV is so inconsistent in the way they choose to "protect" the youth of America from seeing undesirable stuff. I realize that there is a gray area, but MTV needs to figure out what is acceptable and what is not instead of arbitrarily picking and choosing what censored and what gets shown. Damn hypocrites.
Natasha aka candygirl :: MSCL.com

Look, if this is weird for you, being tutored? I don't mind helping you a little longer.
You could have sex with me if you really want to help...I guess that's a "no"?

User avatar
Natasha (candygirl)
MSCL.com Team
MSCL.com Team
Posts: 5374
Joined: Dec 7th 2001, 3:05 am
Location: California

Post by Natasha (candygirl) » Feb 12th 2003, 4:54 pm

mglenn wrote:From one extreme to the other.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. I believe that kids know alot more about sex than parents want to believe but I also think that exposing them to such things when they are very young (under 12) is not really a good idea. After 12 its a losing battle to keep it from them.

But then the issue is that parents don't talk to their kids at all these days. (The stories my girlfriend tells me from grade school :shock: ) There are a whole slew of social issues that need dealt with, including:

Both Parents working to pay the taxes.
Kid is distracted alot? Put them on Riddelin!
Self Esteem is placed before learning. (Ex. if we make Johnny feel good about himself he'll learn, instead of if Johnny learns he will feel good about himself.)

So in closing... Look bright shiny object!!!

Now what was I saying... :P
Wow, I can't believe that those parents put so much effort into getting rid of one word on a spelling test. I have to say from my childhood experience that I knew what a gun was at a pretty young age. I definitely saw them in E.T. and Star Wars so I knew what they were for. That said, I don't think that learning how to spell the word gun made me want to go shoot anyone. I understand trying to protect children from the harsh realities of the world, but I don't think a spelling word is going to cause or prevent a child from knowing what a gun is or using one. What's next? Vegetarians won't want their kids to learn the word "meat"?

A parent's responsiblity is to teach kids what is right or wrong, not to put them in a fantasy bubble where nothing bad exists. I admit that in this particular case we are talking about a first grade class, and that is a bit young, but how many first graders play cowboys and Indians? And how many first graders know that it isn't a politically correct game to play? And how many of them point their fingers and yell "bang bang"? Teaching your kids to be PC is an entirely different discussion, but my point is that most kids play games like that and know words like "gun" by the time they start school.

Removing the word from a spelling list does not protect a child from the existence of guns. If anything, the more responsible thing to do would be to talk to kids about guns so that they know they are not toys to be played with. As terrible as it seems to have to tell kids these things, they also teach kids that strangers should not touch them in their private areas. Is it sickening to have to tell kids not to trust? Yes. Is it necessary? Perhaps.

I agree with what you said regarding self esteem replacing actual learning. Far too many kids do not have the necessary skills yet they are given Cs and passed to the next grade. Although it circumvents the immediate issue of the kids feeling stupid at the time, this only hurts them later in life when they are high school graduates who have poor reading, writing, and math skills.
Natasha aka candygirl :: MSCL.com

Look, if this is weird for you, being tutored? I don't mind helping you a little longer.
You could have sex with me if you really want to help...I guess that's a "no"?

User avatar
starbug
Lifehead
Posts: 1082
Joined: Jun 25th 2002, 4:51 am
Location: UK

Post by starbug » Feb 13th 2003, 6:06 am

The song is currently number 1 in the UK charts...
I like the song. :)


There's been lots of controversy brewing but our age of consent here is 16, so there really isn't alot to say about it other than that they might be being exploited. Having said that, the BBC have taken to censorship anyway.
They show live performances of the girls and helpfully have a presenter there to shoot instead, in case the girls get frisky on stage...
rumours are flying about the fact that they aren't really lesbians and it's all an act.

---------------------------------------------
http://www.urban-hills.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------

User avatar
lance
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1983
Joined: Jul 6th 2002, 4:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Contact:

wow

Post by lance » Feb 13th 2003, 9:39 am

Wow,

A great deal of insight here. Nice to find a good, civil, discussion of issues. Hmmmm, I haven't heard this group yet so I can't really comment on their songs. As to the provocative nature of their videos or marketing...

America I think is kinda of weird on this subject. We want our children to grow up with a balanced informed view of what human beings are, what gender is and sex is about. We want them to have good images of themselves. Yet, advertisers and "the media" bombard us with ads marketing some product showing some scantly clad teen or twenty something female whose body shape represents, what 5% of the total female population?

This is not realistic and serves to make the lives of children and teens that much more difficult. I could go on but my break is short.

My two cents,

Lance Man

User avatar
starbug
Lifehead
Posts: 1082
Joined: Jun 25th 2002, 4:51 am
Location: UK

Post by starbug » Feb 13th 2003, 11:04 am

I think the major problem seems to stem from the fact that
a) they're young (17 or 18?)
b) they're lesbians
c) they kiss in their video.

Now, my point of view here might be controversial, but I think the fact that they're young is irrelevant. At least in the UK, they're over the age of consent. I don't know how this stands worldwide.
The fact that they're lesbians - again, irrelevant. Would anybody be kicking up about this if they were a heterosexual teenage couple? I doubt it; in recent years I have seen several pop acts where young people were kissing and dancing provocatively. Lesbians exist, seeing it isn't going to make any difference to that. I don't think hiding this is healthy - we should be allowed to see these things and educate ourselves about it to reduce ignorance.
They kiss? Big deal. Following on from what I said above, what's the problem?

It might be that they're being exploited, but the same could be said about almost any young pop act around at the moment. Look at Pop Idol; one of the girls in the band is a mere 16 years old. Record/TV producers are making no doubt huge profits on their talent (or lack of) and marketing this to a pre-teen audience. I fail to see the difference...

Perhaps if any of the TV stations are concerned about corrupting our kiddies they should show the video at a later time, or provide a warning. As ever, it is difficult to police who is actually watching these things.

Frankly, I think that the Tatu video pales into insignificance next to some of the violence, language, and themes shown on early slots on TV.

---------------------------------------------
http://www.urban-hills.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------

User avatar
TomSpeed
Marshall Wannabe
Posts: 1226
Joined: Jan 13th 2003, 3:37 pm
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Contact:

Post by TomSpeed » Feb 13th 2003, 11:34 am

I'll add this to my previous comments. It doesn't bother me that they are (or are portraying) lesbians. I object to any type of activity that is exploitative of young people. However, if they truly want to do their act, and their parents support them (or because of age of consent, they don't need their parents' permission), I say more power to them. I'm not going to say what people can and can't do for a living unless it's been deemed illegal by the government. People can change the channel or choose not to buy their CDs. Also, I think their act might help gays/lesbians overcome some of the hatred they receive from others.
TomSpeed

Patty: If Rayanne's not seeing you, and we're not seeing you, who is seeing you?
Graham: And how much of you?
Angela: Dad!
Graham: Oh, I'm sorry! I asked a question about your life, didn't I? Woah, what came over me?
http://www.last.fm/user/TomSpeed/

User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Feb 13th 2003, 1:46 pm

starbug wrote:Perhaps if any of the TV stations are concerned about corrupting our kiddies they should show the video at a later time, or provide a warning. As ever, it is difficult to police who is actually watching these things.

Frankly, I think that the Tatu video pales into insignificance next to some of the violence, language, and themes shown on early slots on TV.
I think the main problem I have with this video is that they are obviously making out and they are under age. I dont care if it was 2 guys, 2 girls, or a 5 couple orgy. They are underage. I have the same problems with the Britney Spears and the Christina Aguileras of the pop world. Though they are atleast legal now.

I personally don't care what is in the video really , i think my main 'problem' with it is in relation to MTV and their policies and America's view of sex and violence and censorship in general, and the whole pedo aspect.

You know that it is just like the Britney/Christina thing. It is mainly 20 - 50 year old guys and 12-17 year old girls obsessing over it. They are marketing pedophilia.

America is a very weird country in the last few decades. We are a country obsessed with sex, but yet make it one of the biggest taboos. We have an administration that thinks it is wrong to allow condoms in the high schools, yet every commercial and tv show revolves around sex and women mainly. This country tries to be exceedingly PC about everything, which is just completely ludicrous. It is like candygirl said earlier about mtv, they bleep out the word "suck" but will show two underage girls going at it. I would personally prefer them to let everything go and let the parents and the viewers make their own decisions on what to watch and what our own kids can watch.

I personally will let my children (when i have them) watch whatever they want...ok probably not hardcore porn ;). My feeling is that a child has to have a mind of their own so that they can make the decisions in their own life about what they can/can't, should/shouldn't do. It is a parents responsibility to help grow their mind, so that they will have the capacity to make smart decisions, and when they make the wrong decision they have the ability to learn from their mistakes.

Believe me, I love the sex and the violence and the harsh language on tv, wish there was more. That is what I know. I am an extremely crass person, I have a mouth like a truck driving sailor :P . The people in my life are the same.

Im just waiting for them to be on the cover of Barely Legal magazine ;)
(damnit i just invalidated my whole post.... :? ) :lol:

User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Feb 13th 2003, 2:01 pm

TomSpeed wrote:I'll add this to my previous comments. It doesn't bother me that they are (or are portraying) lesbians. I object to any type of activity that is exploitative of young people. However, if they truly want to do their act, and their parents support them (or because of age of consent, they don't need their parents' permission), I say more power to them. I'm not going to say what people can and can't do for a living unless it's been deemed illegal by the government. People can change the channel or choose not to buy their CDs. Also, I think their act might help gays/lesbians overcome some of the hatred they receive from others.
I have to go against this post in a few ways. First the government cannot be the end all be all of how people should or can live their lives. By that logic you should be going around telling people they can't get blowjobs since technically it is considered sodomy and sodomy is illegal in a good number of states.

Secondly I dont think this will help the gay community much at all. I think the recent uprising in pseudo-homosexuality that has become popular in teen movies and music does nothing but damage the respectibility of the gay community. A lot of my gay friends feel the same way.

The problem that comes of this, which like you said in your post:
bother me that they are (or are portraying) lesbians
The interviews I have seen with them do not convince me of them being genuine at all in their affection for each other and their manager is shifty looking as well. I think this may be nothing more than a marketing tool. A lot of younger kids (girls mainly it seems) are, in the last decade, getting into bi/homosexuality because it is "cool" and it "freaks people out", but then when they "grow out of it" it leaves an impression on the people in their lives (parents, siblings, other friends) that it was a phase, which then makes all of homosexuality seem like something that you can be "saved" from or that you will eventually just grow out of. It invalidates real homosexual couples and their feelings for each other in society's eyes. Which of course does not help the main issues of same sex marriages and adoption rights for gay couples, besides the everyday issues of renting an apartment or buying a house.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests