Man for all we know he was pressured to take that stance. How can one argue against the contemporary consensus about the song? Unless that narrative was a fake news smear campaign from 50 years ago. Needless to say I doubt I'd be able to contact the author of the song with my measley ass. kek
I can see either or being the case. However it should be noted that the YMCA organization itself tried to distance from the song due to the way it was received at the time, so at the very least, they were completely tone-deaf in dropping a song that would be so easily perceived as a homo anthem. I could of course be putting the cart before the horse here.
From AI-
At the time, the YMCA was still largely perceived as a family-oriented and wholesome organization, and the song's connection to gay culture stirred some unease among conservative members of the organization. The lyrics and the music video, which depicted men having fun in a way that could be interpreted as flirtatious, led to concerns that the song could overshadow the organization's mission and values.
Some local YMCAs reportedly tried to distance themselves from the song, especially when it became a popular party anthem in gay clubs. The organization faced a dilemma: while the song contributed positively to visibility for the LGBTQ+ community, it also potentially conflicted with the YMCA's image as a family-friendly establishment.
Despite this tension, the song's catchy tune and widespread popularity ultimately made it a cultural phenomenon, and the YMCA came to embrace its association with the song over time, recognizing its role in promoting inclusion and diversity. The song remains a significant part of both the YMCA's history and LGBTQ+ culture.
Fair enough, but I don't know what I'd do without the expropriated term "faggot" 😂
It just hits so rightly. On your gay note I just learned something I find highly hilarious:
Apparently, the term gay was used by homosexuals in England after World War One. It was a code word homosexuals could use in general society and no one would think anything of it.
In America after World War Two gays used the term "friend of Dorothy". As late as Reagan's Presidency the military had a special investigation underway looking for the ring leader named "Dorothy" who ran a gay underground in the military...
This thread is full of interesting tidbits. Anyways, I'm leaning towards agreement with you, albeit for the pesky little facts about the Greenwich Village YMCA being a known homosexual hangout, the climate in Greenwich Village during the 70s in general, and the various members of the Village People claiming the song was a gay (homosexual) anthem and also several of them being homosexual themselves
I mean I could write the guy but I doubt he'd reply to a non-public figure. Regardless of that, the abundance of sentiment from the time of the song's release and subsequent years after rings quite another tune... When did the author make the claim that it wasn't about homosexual comradery? (apologies if you already stated the date, I'm half asleep)
Man for all we know he was pressured to take that stance. How can one argue against the contemporary consensus about the song? Unless that narrative was a fake news smear campaign from 50 years ago. Needless to say I doubt I'd be able to contact the author of the song with my measley ass. kek
Ok, I did a google. 2017
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music/tours/village-people-founder-victor-willis-on-why-ymca-wasnt-a-gay-song/news-story/6a5c7a926bf8bb235d1bea9ceb0d6a92
compare with
https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/the-real-story-of-the-ymca-that-inspired-the-village-peoples-gay-anthem
I can see either or being the case. However it should be noted that the YMCA organization itself tried to distance from the song due to the way it was received at the time, so at the very least, they were completely tone-deaf in dropping a song that would be so easily perceived as a homo anthem. I could of course be putting the cart before the horse here.
From AI-
At the time, the YMCA was still largely perceived as a family-oriented and wholesome organization, and the song's connection to gay culture stirred some unease among conservative members of the organization. The lyrics and the music video, which depicted men having fun in a way that could be interpreted as flirtatious, led to concerns that the song could overshadow the organization's mission and values.
Some local YMCAs reportedly tried to distance themselves from the song, especially when it became a popular party anthem in gay clubs. The organization faced a dilemma: while the song contributed positively to visibility for the LGBTQ+ community, it also potentially conflicted with the YMCA's image as a family-friendly establishment.
Despite this tension, the song's catchy tune and widespread popularity ultimately made it a cultural phenomenon, and the YMCA came to embrace its association with the song over time, recognizing its role in promoting inclusion and diversity. The song remains a significant part of both the YMCA's history and LGBTQ+ culture.
Fair enough, but I don't know what I'd do without the expropriated term "faggot" 😂
It just hits so rightly. On your gay note I just learned something I find highly hilarious:
https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/3z55uj/when_did_the_word_gay_change_from_meaning_happy/
This thread is full of interesting tidbits. Anyways, I'm leaning towards agreement with you, albeit for the pesky little facts about the Greenwich Village YMCA being a known homosexual hangout, the climate in Greenwich Village during the 70s in general, and the various members of the Village People claiming the song was a gay (homosexual) anthem and also several of them being homosexual themselves
I mean I could write the guy but I doubt he'd reply to a non-public figure. Regardless of that, the abundance of sentiment from the time of the song's release and subsequent years after rings quite another tune... When did the author make the claim that it wasn't about homosexual comradery? (apologies if you already stated the date, I'm half asleep)