No worries!
TIL Ireland isnāt real.
Anyway, havenāt we gotten way off track? Weāve gone from talking about Eurovision, and straight down the rabbit hole to talking about how the sentiment that something can be enjoyed purely because it isnāt American was somewhat disturbing to some reason, to talking about whether discrimination against SAWCSM is possible or real (I think it is, at least eventually.) We could go further down that rabbit hole, but I personally donāt think it would be productive.
I agree with Falcor. Can we get back to the person who has that fabulous hair, fabulous dress, and fabulous beard? Ok, not being familiar with this at all, is the trans aspect of it totally serious, trollish, or somewhere in between?
In civilian life Tom Neuwirth is a cis gay man. Conchita Wurst has been his drag persona since his teenage years and she first appeared in front of a wider audience in 2011. As far as I can tell the character is sincere as a genderfuck statement, but itās not serious in the sense that he sees Conchita as his true self.
5 Likes
I watched the video of her performance and I was impressed with it, and the gender switching stuff in it was so clever - the way she could play both masculine and feminine roles so well - be in this spangly dress, hair and makeup all pageant style, but then break the woman role and give a very masculine expression and remind you she had a beard as well. Then the next shot itās all diva to the max. Iām not much for these giant uvula quaking ballads, but her voice is strong and she used it to such an interesting effect.
2 Likes
Thinking about the music? Do not take this contest seriously 
, X-factor seems more about the topic.
Believing that Eurovision is about a music is not far from believing that a porn is about love - there is something about it, but not quite so, and watching is not always fun.
This is actually completely political contest about who does/doesnāt like who at the moment, music is there only so that you could hum something to yourself, for amusement, while trying to figure out all the dependencies and animosities.
If you do not believe that this is political, two sarcastic proves:
- biggest financial contributors to EBU (European Broadcasting Union) automatically qualify to finals
- publicity can vote for their favourite and it will be ignored
ā¦ money + fake democracy ā¦ yep, it is about politics.
To be honest, I have watched Eurovision only once; the music wasnāt (isnāt) that much appealing and the entire contest was (is) plastic and meretricious.
To be honest: I am from Poland, and I do not believe we have attempted this contest with anything really good, sinceā¦ hm, ever?
Btw. I āloveā when musicians try to explain some (sometimes political) ārationaleā for their songs, and In case of this yearās entry this is āirony on how Poland is viewed by other countries to be behindā. Yep, lets fight that stereotype with short skirt folk costumes and boobs - way to go (though I still do like the view anyway.)
(This post has been written while humming to āSilence and Fireā by Coma - I really do hope that they will never be at Eurovision)
How is it ignored? Voting was 50% by televoting and 50% by a panel of judges in all but a handful of countries.
But I do agree. That contest was never intended to be taken seriously. It is FUN.
Yeah, but there was that one time when Lordi won, and it. Was. Awesome.
1 Like
The 50/50 thing seems to be fair, but let do some math (I will reduce the problem to favour/against from the problem of ordering the list by votes)
Assume such problem: there is important issue to be voted in favour/agains by some community of lets say 5000 folks and 2 judges board. Votes are taken the same way as in EV 50/50 of result and there is need for 50% + 1 (0.51) of final sum of votes for the issue to pass; everybody votes and voting in favour is 1, against is 0; votes are summed. People voted in following way: 4000 of 5000 ladies/guys are in favour of the issue and 2 of 2 panel judges are against. This means that issue got 4000/5000 -> 4/5 (0.8 of all) votes in favour from common people and 0/2 ->0 from judges. Now we take 50% of each and sum: 0.8 *0.5 + 0 *0.5 = 0.4. So it seems that 0.4 is not enough for the issue to pass even if there are 4000 people in favour of it and only 1002 against.
There is probability that one of judges would be in favour which would change the result, but the example is to show how the ratio of votes may be manipulated to change the result as wanted according to ānominatedā experts/judges/etc.
EV voting is different because it is about the place on list not in favour/against in binary context, but still it is not that much different. Play with math, it is FUN.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
