2 ms·

> These Moog dancers don't fit that mode. I mean, the second dance ends with about 40 seconds just watching the cameras, which have crowded the frustrated dance

by harry8 4y ago

> These Moog dancers don't fit that mode. I mean, the second dance ends with about 40 seconds just watching the cameras, which have crowded the frustrated dancers off-screen. How is that "dad appeal"? Maybe that's a question of taste? Of opinion? You're obviously not wrong I just disagree it's so clear cut. This stuff is not Benny Hill. Note that the "Moog dancers" don't have to be tailoring their stuff to "Dad appeal" for some tv exec to look at it and think, "yep, that works and we can defend it on the grounds of high art when Mary Whitehouse and her ilk start yelling corruption of youth" or whatever. Obviously to view it completely solely through a lens of sexuality is as silly as viewing anything in life in those terms. There is colour, there is movement, there are visual patterns ranging from the simple to the more complex, there is order that degrades and is restored, it can be appreciated and discussed completely ignoring the sexual elements and there are circumstances where it is utterly reasonable to do so. Benny Hill had some really terrific, visually clever and hilariously funny gags [1] that weren't about women with big tits bending over or a man with the head of a swan coming out of the fly in his trousers. The Moog Dancers really aren't much like that kind of brazen "for the 12 year old in the dads." Note that I've argued both sides of this w.r.t. the moog dancers and don't claim to have "the" answer. Your opinion is as good as anyone's. "Not as bad as ..." Doesn't mean "has absolutely nothing in common with." [1] I wanted to link a sketch here that I remember that is probably on youtube but google in their infinite wisdom are murdering searching for what you want in favour of algorithmic curation of what they want to show you so there's no way I can find it, or anything Benny Hill that doesn't involve bikini clad women and additional misogyny concerning women who are of a different age and shape. He got the rep for good reason.

eesmith 4y ago
> for some tv exec Again, this is all very conjectural of you. This argument can be used to assert that a show with an attractive woman is on TV because the woman is attractive, and not because of other merits. It's demeaning. That's not saying it isn't true. Like I said, there is solid evidence that "Dad factor" did influence the BBC. But it demands something besides conjecture. Else we could conjecture that the BBC scheduled association football because the TV execs wanted to appeal to the repressed homoerotic feelings of its viewership.[1] > Note that I've argued both sides of this w.r.t. the moog dancers and don't claim to have "the" answer. "Argue" is what people do in a bull session. Give some evidence that one or the other has basis in reality. My experience and understanding tells me that the decision to program this sort of act because of the "sexualising the women", in the "both points of view" you see IS NOT TRUE. While people can and do sexualize just about anything (people have probably shipped Rumpole of the Bailey), what I see in these video shows no signs of deliberate titillation, and yet with many opportunities to do so. And I see many parts which are a turn-off, like the crowding out by the camera. Further, unless this was part of a continuing series of sexualising acts, why would a tv exec care? It's not going to affect ratings. While on the other hand, we do know modern dance and avante-garde performance exist, and some look like this of their own accord without attempts to sexualize, and we know variety acts of that era also included novelty performances for the oddity of it. [1] Personally, I only watch Time Team because of the pure eroticism of Philip Harding, and anyone who hasn't looked at him and "let their imagination go at least a little probably has some pretty profound health issues and my sympathies".

by harry8 4y ago

eesmith 4y ago

> for some tv exec Again, this is all very conjectural of you. This argument can be used to assert that a show with an attractive woman is on TV because the woman is attractive, and not because of other merits. It's demeaning. That's not saying it isn't true. Like I said, there is solid evidence that "Dad factor" did influence the BBC. But it demands something besides conjecture. Else we could conjecture that the BBC scheduled association football because the TV execs wanted to appeal to the repressed homoerotic feelings of its viewership.[1] > Note that I've argued both sides of this w.r.t. the moog dancers and don't claim to have "the" answer. "Argue" is what people do in a bull session. Give some evidence that one or the other has basis in reality. My experience and understanding tells me that the decision to program this sort of act because of the "sexualising the women", in the "both points of view" you see IS NOT TRUE. While people can and do sexualize just about anything (people have probably shipped Rumpole of the Bailey), what I see in these video shows no signs of deliberate titillation, and yet with many opportunities to do so. And I see many parts which are a turn-off, like the crowding out by the camera. Further, unless this was part of a continuing series of sexualising acts, why would a tv exec care? It's not going to affect ratings. While on the other hand, we do know modern dance and avante-garde performance exist, and some look like this of their own accord without attempts to sexualize, and we know variety acts of that era also included novelty performances for the oddity of it. [1] Personally, I only watch Time Team because of the pure eroticism of Philip Harding, and anyone who hasn't looked at him and "let their imagination go at least a little probably has some pretty profound health issues and my sympathies".