And now? I guess after people began saying "Rolling Stone is SO GAY," they decided to try to do something about it. Which, you know, is sort of like Kevin Spacey hiring a Harlem prostitute in an effort to turn straight.
Speaking of Harlem Prostitutes...
WHAT the HELL is "HOT" about that cover? I mean, assuming you're not a pimp looking for new meat to sell on 125th Street.
Is this 1977? Donna Summer back in town? This "Bad Girl" is somebody named Cardi B. Her sister is Mardis Gras. Or Mel B. Or something? Is this another new trend we must suffer through? Idiot morons who are so stupid they can't spell their last name?
I did suffer through a performance by this idiot. She was on Jimmy Kimmel's show, and ruined it. She came on at the end, and "rapped" some self-important crap about how wonderful she is. That's what rappers do. They strut around and talk shit about themselves. When they get famous, they start feuds and talk shit about everyone else.
Kimmel dutifully came over to her and thanked her for her wonderful performance. After all, somebody who looks as stupid and trashy as THIS bitch, you're thankful she didn't curse or piss on the floor.
WHAT is sexy about this image? Haven't you seen it in every issue of Players? Isn't it the reason why you no longer pass a newsstand and see magazines named Jaguar, Duke, Dude or Gent? Because THIS corny crap is NOT HOT. No, it's snot.
Crappy B is an ordinary looking bitch, and garishly lolling her tongue around in her mouth makes her several years behind a little white girl named MILEY CYRUS. As for the outfit, it's Victoria's Secret stuff found in a Salvation Army Thrift Shop.
And THIS is what Rolling Stone puts on a cover? When they're trying to SELL the magazine and run away?
You'd think the publisher of Rolling Stone was gay, or something.
Oh. He is.
You remember these?
Embarrassing. Those covers do not look like they're for a music album. More like "Gay Pedophiles Monthly."
Before anyone starts mewling, "Oh, this guy is SO homophobic," I'll remind you that I was an editor of a rock mag myself. ROCKET didn't neglect or deny the "wild side" of rock. There was room in its 100 pages for "cute" pix of Andy Gibb and Rod Stewart with their shirts off, and I devoted several pages to an interview with gender-bending disco star Amanda Lear. Because ALL types of music were welcome in ROCKET. The important thing was not whether an artist was gay or transsexual, but whether the music was worth something, and relevant to our readers. Harry Styles' music is worth shit to most Rolling Stone subscribers and trying to change the demographic makes no sense. Cardi B's music is worth shit to most Rolling Stone subscribers, and her "look" is dated.
Wenner approved this lame Cardi B. hooker tongue-tangling trash-lingerie cover because this is his idea of what heterosexuals find HOT in 2017?
This is not getting him off the hook in being a kind of Kevin Spacey of the publishing world. Spacey made unwanted homosexual advances on various straights. This can be pretty damaging, when some 18 year-old guy finds himself being considered a pushover for a gay man. It has to send a message of not just, "this actor is arrogant and pushy," but "what the HELL kind of signal am I sending, that a guy can put his hand on his thigh or down the front of my pants, and it would be ok?"
And what kind of signal has Jann Wenner been sending, by turning Rolling Stone into a weird combo of "Tiger Beat" and "Beat Off to Blueboy?" When you've subscribed to Rolling Stone, you want the profanity of Matt Taibbi, and gnarly covers of creepy aging rockers like Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger and Neil Young. You do NOT want HARRY STYLES, and you don't want to keep up with a topless Bieber. And it makes you damn uncomfortable to be shown that kind of homo-erotica as if you want to see it, or as if that's the reason you subscribed.
So yes, this IS a heterosexual cover for a change. NICE TRY. Too bad it's corny, dated, and NOT HOT. And Cardi B. as a singer and musician doesn't belong in Rolling Stone at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment