Sorry, I am splitting hairs because I feel my comments are construed way out and "extreme" when I am only saying I believe a
"toned down" would help the "sport" aspect be MORE prevalent other then this distraction that
OVER flamboyancy brings to the table.
The Sexual reasoning is meant as
in comparison not as a exact example. Sexual programs and provocative content detract from the "competitive sport," to bring
unequal emphasis on to the artistic - HENCE disrupting the balance of sport and art. Flamboyance does the same thing IMO, and that of many that don't already subscribe to being a fan also state as being an issue.
I have a friend who will
never be into FS, and his input is more vital then someone who is a fan when you are considering factors that make FS less "appealing" then
it once was to the US audence.
I think the majority of straight men think that artsy is sissy. No matter how macho a style Baryshnakov may affect and no matter how successful a Don Juan he may be off stage, still I think the majority of straight men in America think, "He's a ballet dancer, he must be gay. If he were straight, would he be prancing about in those sissy tights?"
I believe that to be very true.:agree: Baryshnakov is supposed to be more artsy. FS is supposed to have a balance between the 2. When you start putting more emphasis on the artistic aspects like "free to act or dress more closely to the pro circuit or a Show" at that point it has become more like Ballet and it has
at that point lost the balance.
The football and "men in tights" is the perfect example. Even though they are wearing tights the emphasis is still on the sport. Sport is meant as the emphasis of Football, the outfits are way down the list of importance. FS should have equal emphasis or it should just go all pro circuit and tour venues such as a broadway show would.
The thing that has happened as a
result of this "flamboyancy" is exactly the problem, here we have the
emphasis of attention on sexuality preference. this is due to the OVER prevalence of the question coming to mind in the first place. If the flamboyancy was not there to such a degree this would have been 10 times less likely to have been an issue. How could one speculate "riding the fence" if the issue was not apparent in the first place. If skaters like Johnny addressed FS more EQUALLY as a sport and not forcing so much attention on how unique and the sexuality, this never would have been an issue to begin with. I don't see these issues arising around Jeff Buttle. But Jeff appears to be more serious than Johnny when it comes to being a skater opposed to a "pop figure."
I would say you Earn your right to be who ever you want to be known as once you go pro and have proved your worth in the competitive ranks, until then follow the guidelines and be an athlete. Even do your little advertising gig if you like, but the
"personal business" stays off the ice.
That is the whole point. If there was not
so much flamboyant behavior and obvious "attempts at getting attention" in the first place then this never would have been an issue. The fact it is an issue is PROOF that the balance has become skewed and there is attention on things that have no reason other then a skater getting more attention and not for skill but "their voice in the community."
If one is to think that "freedom of expression is going to suffer" if the guidelines to how flamboyant an outfit or behavior can be, then "expression" is in question. Why could they convey expression in the past without such extremes?
Why is it necessary to implicate sexual preference, and why is that allowed when there is not supposed to be any strong sexual overtones anyway?
Flamboyant men have a correlation to a sexual preference - be that the morally correct thing or not, a fact is a fact. G-strings and feather butts have strong implications to sexual morality - be that the morally correct thing or not, a fact is a fact. One might offend more then another to any given individual, the fact remains
they can both be "offensive" and their importance is ZERO if f FS is the TRULY the main concern.
And I am sorry to disagree, but anyone that thinks Johnny picked the passion JUST BECAUSE IT WAS A GOOD ROUTINE
That is totally laughable. He picked it because it would cause controversy and give him attention. DUH! That is where "using" one aspect of FS is not in balance with the other. ANd his skating has also suffered whether it be the reason or not, JW's skating is not following up on the attention he is getting.
And last (not that I am a fan of Lund) BUT
Lund is acting in defense of gays where
Jonhnny is using it to his personal gain, is the point. Lund acted inappropriately but his intent is more admirable then one who rides the wave of attention with no regard for those who it has effect.
) like this.
) but the amount of severity is relative to the individual and your or even the general populous, does not need to speak for the entire world as far as what is worse. That is opinion. Sexual expression can be just as important to "self expression" as "flamboyant" and neither one are NECESSARY IN FS.
