i recently saw this movie on ovation and i love it too death, hubby promises to get the dvd for me.
i read that a part was cut out so it could show in the us, luckily i was able to find the clip on youtube.
i wonder what would have happened if they had just shown it.
MrsJones said:
Yeah, something about twirling boobies kinda puts some people off
Not me
But did you notice the little politically correct touch – Josephine Baker escaped the crazed hordes in the nick of time, while Fred Astaire was ... oops, spoiler...
gently feral
i recently saw this movie on ovation and i love it too death, hubby promises to get the dvd for me.
i read that a part was cut out so it could show in the us, luckily i was able to find the clip on youtube.
i wonder what would have happened if they had just shown it.
MrsJones, I distinctly remember seeing the clip you posted as the opening segment to The Triplets of Belleville. I know it's on the DVD, right up front. Maybe the Ovation folks are just shy
gently feral
under copyright law, any song can be legally covered, as long as the proper fee is paid.
so that means i could release versions of kingdom songs?
that would be kind of funny.
Gopher:
I was thinking it would be funny if someone put Christmas lyrics or atheist lyrics to some of these songs.
Solace, if you're at all serious about this, go to the UUA website and track down their hymnbook, Singing the Living Tradition. That is precisely what they did to a lot of fine old Victorian and Renaissance hymn tunes, and I know they had all the legal stuff squared away.
gently feral
i looked this up because i was remembering it wrong.
i thought it was "do not go gentle into that dark night" and "rage against the dying of the moon" for some reason.
that was a little confusing because the moon has a rebirth and i was wondering what the author's point was.
If the meaning is so obscure that we are lost before we even begin to consider it, what's the point?amicus, if that's actually a valid critique, I'm screwed
Here is my own death poem, written over 5 years ago – obscure but evocative – and, I fear, less optimistic than the others offered here:
The sightless eye slid open, and
The wordless mind illiterate read
Black ink upon black pages; found
All tongues are foreign now; and turned
To hungry trembling sleep instead.
The muscle sags upon the bone:
The hand too slack to lift the bread
To flaccid lips that hunger still
For sweeter food than this, for here
Even the sugar is made of lead.
The awkward flesh in mute debauch
Lies orderly with legs unspread.
Unpanting lungs make voiceless shouts
An orgy of silence; still tongues lap
Dry juices, unseen pink and red.
The Brownian motion of the soul
Turns the eye backward in the head
Suavely & gently; yet it is
The cosmic fibrillation that
Will tear the hard-lit stars to shreds.
g ently f eral
so.... i'm thinking.
i'm thinking cuz i was at my shrink's today... and i'm cleaning... those 2 things get my brain working and i was thinking..... i am (was) a jw (ex) who is a housewife, "at home mom".
could there possibly be anyone else in the whole friggin world who has ever used their brain less???
Solace1998,
if you havent used your brain, thats totally your fault, no offense. Being a witness, i used my brain more than any other time of my life, it was a completely stimulating experience
New light for you, I have to chime in a reluctant and tepidly muttered " amen ."
When I was a Witness, I found it intellectually stimulating for a while simply because it was the first time I'd ever encountered that sh*t. That lasted about ten years, but the delusion continued. And it was still the days when the WTBS was naive enough to cite sources, so I would happily read the books that were referred to; which is how I came to be one of the few Witnesses that read The Neck of the Giraffe, for instance. I called it "the bibliography trick."
But I still bought into all the cult bullshit. All the books I pulled at random from library shelves "because they just looked interesting" were either cookbooks or fiction. It took homeschooling to change that -- and I still avoided evolution.
(and i was a pioneer in college then,
New light already explained:
I couldn't go to college, cuz we were "good"
Don't tell me you don't know exactly what that means. And if your parents/elders/friends said college was ok, don't tell me you don't know exactly why the non-degreed exJWs on this board are jealous of you.
New Light for you,
Where do you even start?
You've gotten a lot of good advice here. I started with the "bibliography trick;" as you start reading nonfiction, raid the bibliography; read all the titles listed there that sound interesting. Don't be afraid to tackle a book that looks too hard - if you understand even 25% of it, you're ahead of the game.
You might even want to take some community college courses so you have some moral support while you get used to tougher brain-food.
And learn to balance a checkbook
gentlyferal
to ponder.... if it was 10 years + from now, all this jw stuff was just a thing of the past and you made it thru and life is good now... where would you be?
what you would be doing?
and how would you now refer to this "past" or would you?
Oh, since you stipulate that "life is good now" in 2018, I'll play.
You know what, I think that's enough. Um, everything else continues as before -- that is, what's good now doesn't change.
Come to think of it, I might have almost forgotten being a jaydub.
gently feral
so i'm 37 and i've only been with one man, my ex-husband, in my entire life.
i just started a new relationship with a wonderful man but i'm fighting the preprogramming that comes from being a dub for 35 years.
how have other people overcome the inhibitions and issues that come from the ridiculously rigid sexual mindset of the wtbs?
Seeker4,
funner and funner!
I miss read this as "funnier and funnier," which is also true.
brunnhilde,
How have other people overcome the inhibitions and issues that come from the ridiculously rigid sexual mindset of the WTBS?
Well, I had to do it the hard way: even before I left the Spoof, I saw the necessity to question everything I believed. Literally everything. Sexual exclusivity was one of the things that fell by the wayside.
brunnhildeagain:
I just hate how sick and panicky I feel everytime we're intimate at all, and I'm talking just kissing, let alone anything more advanced. He and I have talked about it and he's been very supportive and loving but I still can feel the anxiety.
I also, from time to time, felt it useful and refreshing to go out and "earn myself another disfellowshipping" -- without hurting anybody. That is, anything short of murder, fraud, rape, etc. maybe this idea will be of some use to you: "I am not sinning against the Creator of Love, Sex, and All Things Juicy; I am giving pleasure to a good man and putting distance between myself and a poisonous cult."
bluesbreaker59,
I'm one of those that believes it should be a committed relationship. ...no one night stands... But that's MY BELIEF
Basically, I agree: I've done both, and I prefer committed relationships -- because they are more nourishing and MORE FUN. One-night stands can indeed be disappointing -- not in the Victorian-drama sense -- just frustrating. It's up to the individual to decide whether it's better than enforced celibacy.
gently feral
i am just having a seizure lmao at these cat pics.
i had three gorgeous "kittehs" before i moved to madison, and had to give them away.
i cried for a month.
i feel the need to express how i feel and felt about my life as a gay man.
i was brought up from birth as a jehovahs witness.
this has played a major part in my life and it has been a real struggle to get past.
Mr. Ted,
Are you thinking of Dr. Gerald Davison, professor of psychology at USC?
Yes, that is the man -- thank you!
GentlyFeral
i feel the need to express how i feel and felt about my life as a gay man.
i was brought up from birth as a jehovahs witness.
this has played a major part in my life and it has been a real struggle to get past.
I merely want to know if there are those out there who have actually read the book by NicolosiI did read it when it was fairly new. I was a deep-dyed, heterosexual jaydub back then, and even so, it set off my bullshit detector. I summed it up as "thirty-year-old guesswork" (Based on theories from the 1950's which formed the basis for failed experiments in "de-gaying" therapy which were conducted in the 1970's; I've been trying to find the reference for about an hour. All I have is a memory of an old PBS documentary in which a researcher conducted orientation-changing therapy for months or years and put together a paper to be read at a conference.
(By the time the conference occurred, he had collected more info which convinced him his own paper was wrong. He tried to take it off the program, but I can't remember if the conference organizers insisted on it being presented or not. Anwyay, he told everyone at the conference that his own "de-gaying" therapy program didn't work.
(If anyone remembers who I'm talking about, I'd absolutely love to have a name to attach to this story!)
gentlyferal
