KEITH CAPUTO IS NOW A WOMAN� SORT OF

I know this is kinda old news, but did anyone in here know about this?

No not really. Biohazard are more on the butch side, while Keith Caputo always had a very sensitive soul and singing style. If you haven�t heard Life of Agony, I can highly recommend both "The River Runs Red" and "Ugly". The former is essentially a heavy hardcore album with a very distinct sounding vocalist and some really cool concept lyrics about a guy who ends up commiting suicide. With "Ugly" they went into a more alternative metal direction. While I definitely prefer "The River Runs Red", "Ugly" features some really great tracks too.

Apparently that hasn�t happened yet. In a recent interview Sal A. (drummer in Life of Agony) said that the band wouldn�t play together anymore though. They�ve basically disbanded. He named Keith�s wish to pursue his new lifestyle as one of the reasons, but the main reason was that they didn�t enjoy playing together anymore and had hit a brick wall creatively speaking.

Yep.

Not to be homophobic, but it was a really sad day the day that I found out that Rob Halford was gay.  The leather and spikes and motorcycles and his singing just epitomized macho for me.  It was so much more macho to be a fan of Judas Priest than it was to be a fan of say, Elton John or Wham! or even Queen, who admittedly I am also a big fan of.  It is a lifestyle choice that I can't say that I personally understand but to each their own, and all that. 

Jonas, don't get me wrong.  I don't understand it and quite frankly it makes me somewhat uncomfortable to discuss or associate with, but I am by no means a "put 'em up against the wall" kind of guy.  I fully support anyone's right to be however it is they want to be (or I suppose if it is the case however it is that they are).  And I am not closed-minded about the "Were made that way option".  I suspect that there is a nature aspect as well as a nurture aspect involved.  Different chemical levels in the brain and whatnot, as well as the "I'm a boy, I'm a boy, but my mama won't admit it" effect.  But I also fully admit I am by no means an expert on the subject and by no means have an interest in becoming an expert on the subject.  

^If there�s one thing I wouldn�t call you scott it would be close-minded.

Edited by UMUR - 23 Feb 2012 at 1:13pm

I still can't believe anyone was shocked about Halford! I don't have firm opinions on the tranny stuff, but I think that transsexuals are ultra-conservative in their definitions of what it means to be male or female. They don't bend the rigid stereotypes at all, rather they bend themselves backwards in order to better fit stereotypes of the opposite sex. I watched some TV show on it too, and I noticed that the transgendered people often spoke about how hard they tried to be the perfect girl or boy before giving up the pretense. Then, not feeling authentic, they threw themselves into emulating the trappings of the other sex. Before going through all that, I would rather see people seeking acceptance for who they are, on a continuum. Boys should be able to have long hair etc. if they want, and girls do not have to wear dresses and play with dolls. Instead of a radical rejection of the status quo, sex-changers accept it unblinkingly, and radically reject themselves. Does that make sense?

Dominator wrote: I still can't believe anyone was shocked about Halford! I don't have firm opinions on the tranny stuff, but I think that transsexuals are ultra-conservative in their definitions of what it means to be male or female. They don't bend the rigid stereotypes at all, rather they bend themselves backwards in order to better fit stereotypes of the opposite sex. I watched some TV show on it too, and I noticed that the transgendered people often spoke about how hard they tried to be the perfect girl or boy before giving up the pretense. Then, not feeling authentic, they threw themselves into emulating the trappings of the other sex. Before going through all that, I would rather see people seeking acceptance for who they are, on a continuum. Boys should be able to have long hair etc. if they want, and girls do not have to wear dresses and play with dolls. Instead of a radical rejection of the status quo, sex-changers accept it unblinkingly, and radically reject themselves. Does that make sense?

I understand what you're saying. But I guess that the reason why sex-changers go about constructing their identity the way they do is because society does not give room for that continuum which you are talking about. I'm sure that we've all felt the oppression of gender ideals and stereotypes breathe down our necks whenever we've done something that just slightly "deviates" from the gender-related norms of society.

Children are very aware of society's gender ideals - they are force-fed all sorts of social ideals through the media, through their toys, through the adults, through the institutions they go through. They're being brainwashed through socialization.