1. I can imagine that you are mad when you have tickets and traveled a long way.

    Agree with Dieder.
    The cancellation is about the way how minorities are being treated in mainly the Republican states in the US.

    At least I think this the reason of Springsteen.

    If cancellation a concert the right way is, I don't know. Sure is that it gives lots of attention.
  2. I agree with Dieder too.
  3. Easy to be pissed when it's your show that's pulled, regardless of the reason.
  4. I am a huge Springsteen fan, but I think there are many many ways how to make a bold statement other than let down fans who have nothing to do with it. Yes, it attracts attention, but mostly attention of Springsteen fans and mostly those who were affected. I seriously doubt that some politicians will start to think differently because a rock show was canceled. Even if it was a Springsteen show. Thousands of disappointed fans is pretty much the only result, I think.

    Why not organise a concert (or other event) if Bruce wants to attract attention to this case? That would be something positive. This is a negative reaction to something negative, punishing those who have nothing to do with it. I would not thing Bruce would use such means.
  5. it was all over the news all day long the other day here
    if the disappointed fans (rightly pissed off at the very first moment, i would not be with him however) don't understand the reasons that moved him well he better lose them than have them.
    Stipe's quote by Dieder is a very good call and it's appropriate here like for U2, Pearl Jam, Clash, John Lennon to say some
    runaway american dream
  6. Originally posted by dieder:Made me think of a Michael Stipe comment, regarding their increased popularity in the 90s: Stipe expressed concerns that there are people among the crowds that they did not want to be there, because they did not feel the same about things as REM. Same with Bruce I guess, there are a lot of fans that are not as progressive or liberal as he is. Those will probably be bummed, but I think its a great statement, as it is for the greater good.

    [..]


    What you're saying is: I do not really care as long as it does not affect me, and I refuse to think beyond the human created dichotomies.

    [..]



    It's about human rights.
    No , that's not what Im saying ...


    How is it intolerant or "vile' to want to keep women's restrooms for women?

    Actually, once you let transgenders use the ladies room, you also essentially open the door to all men using the women's rooms (since anyone can claim to be a transgender) and I'm against that.

    It is a modesty issue. I'm sure most women don't want to use the restroom with a guy sitting in the next stall. As my wife said "It is bad enough having to do my business in a room with strange women...with a man it would be impossible."

    But more importantly it is a safety issue. Child molesters and sexual deviants will use this as an opportunity to gain entry to women's restrooms to prey on young women or children. That is the problem .

    I feel sorry for the transgenders and if there were a way to have it where they can use the ladies room without giving free access to all men, then I would be okay with it. But I don't think there is a way.

    Im not going to go on and on about it.....IMO it was wrong for him to cancel the show on such short notice...he screwed his fans....thats a fact......he did what he did , I thought it was wrong and thats that .
  7. ops Bryan Adams has cancelled the concert in mississipi
  8. Originally posted by Happy24:I am a huge Springsteen fan, but I think there are many many ways how to make a bold statement other than let down fans who have nothing to do with it. Yes, it attracts attention, but mostly attention of Springsteen fans and mostly those who were affected. I seriously doubt that some politicians will start to think differently because a rock show was canceled. Even if it was a Springsteen show. Thousands of disappointed fans is pretty much the only result, I think.

    Why not organise a concert (or other event) if Bruce want to attract attention to this case? That would be something positive. This is a negative reaction to something negative, punishing those who have nothing to do with it. I would not thing Bruce would use such means.
    There you have it...well said.......agree 100%..
  9. I can understand that better, I mean the new law in Mississippi is just really wtf? It's like Saudi Arabia there or something?
  10. Originally posted by clover68:it was all over the news all day long the other day here
    if the disappointed fans (rightly pissed off at the very first moment, i would not be with him however) don't understand the reasons that moved him well he better lose them than have them.
    Stipe's quote by Dieder is a very good call and it's appropriate here like for U2, Pearl Jam, Clash, John Lennon to say some
    runaway american dream
    I am not from US and know pretty much nothing about this case, so I can be easily wrong, but from the little I read I have a feeling that the politicians might be actually very happy about the fact that Bruce helped them to attract attention to this case, that it is "all over the news." I mean this is an old trick - to give something to people they can wildly argue about and be angry about, something the politicians actually don't care about in order that the "important" things (involving a lot of money) would go ahead unnoticed. I mean, I have an experience that that is usually the case with all the things that are "all over the news." Of course it always helps a lot, if words like human rights, basic principles...can be used widely

    Again - I know very little about this particular case, so don't be angry with me if I am totally wrong, I absolutely don't want to judge who and what is right or wrong.
  11. i'm not a yankee either hehe
    of course it was not the main thing been talked about; we here, in Italy , are plenty of internal issues hehe
    i used a wrong expression, my bad .. in few words i wanted to say that it was not only noticed by fans
  12. Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]
    No , that's not what Im saying ...


    How is it intolerant or "vile' to want to keep women's restrooms for women?

    Actually, once you let transgenders use the ladies room, you also essentially open the door to all men using the women's rooms (since anyone can claim to be a transgender) and I'm against that.

    It is a modesty issue. I'm sure most women don't want to use the restroom with a guy sitting in the next stall. As my wife said "It is bad enough having to do my business in a room with strange women...with a man it would be impossible."

    But more importantly it is a safety issue. Child molesters and sexual deviants will use this as an opportunity to gain entry to women's restrooms to prey on young women or children. That is the problem .

    I feel sorry for the transgenders and if there were a way to have it where they can use the ladies room without giving free access to all men, then I would be okay with it. But I don't think there is a way.

    Im not going to go on and on about it.....IMO it was wrong for him to cancel the show on such short notice...he screwed his fans....thats a fact......he did what he did , I thought it was wrong and thats that .
    But more importantly it is a safety issue. Child molesters and sexual deviants will use this as an opportunity to gain entry to women's restrooms to prey on young women or children. That is the problem .


    I do not think this has anything to do with more rights for transgenders. These people will do harm no matter what. Let's agree to disagree. I feel sorry your show was cancelled, and hope you get a chance to see his show later.