GQ hides behind those letters. Let’s not forget that GQ stands for Gentlemen's Quarterly. The question stands, then: are photos of girls dressed like beerbelly men fantasies really what a gentlemen should be displaying as their thought of the ideal woman? The question isn’t whether I find the pictures hot (because I do), it’s a matter of whether they embody what Gentlemen's means.
Moreover, the photo shoot was so uncreative, it is funny. It’s funny that they got so much publicity on a bland, boring, trite, overly done idea and now are going to bank (in some way--they hope more than just spank) off of it. A high schooler with only boxers on could have come up with this idea. GQ should stand for Genius Quality instead of Gratuitous Quandary. As you scroll up and down in search for the photos, I’m not going to post any of them. Why? I think they’re terrible at being creative, not terrible morally, like the unnecessary Parental whatevers who go out of their way to make a finger pointing at a girl's boob sexual when, in fact, it could be educational. Such as, "Oh my, look at that boob, it’s fake. *point*" Who cares?
All situations, no matter bad or good, give birth to opportunity, and in this overly bad situation (because the photos surely suck the creative air out of any room like a black hole of stupid) the good that came of it was that I got to find Dianna Agron’s blog and I’m now following her. In addition, she said something quite smart, charming and totally on point, without being brazen, obnoxious or a terrible human being like the ones from "Survivor" or "The Apprentice." Without turning Quinn on everyone (which is hot in thought), she pleasantly stated her side without it coming from anyone but herself.
And a tidbit from her great point (I suggest you go to the link and read it all):
In the land of Madonna, Britney, Miley, Gossip Girl, other public figures and shows that have pushed the envelope and challenged the levels of comfort in their viewers and fans…we are not the first. Now, in perpetuating the type of images that evoke these kind of emotions, I am sorry. If you are hurt or these photos make you uncomfortable, it was never our intention. And if your eight-year-old has a copy of our GQ cover in hand, again I am sorry. But I would have to ask, how on earth did it get there?
…Glee is a show that represents the underdogs, which is a feeling I have embraced much of my own life, and to those viewers, the photos in GQ don’t give them that same feeling. I understand completely.
For GQ, they asked us to play very heightened versions of our school characters. A ‘Hit Me Baby One More Time’ version. At the time, it wasn’t my favorite idea, but I did not walk away. I must say, I am trying to live my life with a sharpie marker approach. You can’t erase the strokes you’ve made, but each step is much bolder and more deliberate….
My respect for beautiful, bedhead Dianna Agron went out of this world.
I use to watch "Gossip Girl" every Monday and ignored the parental whining from the overlords of the Parental group of whatever. I stopped watching it because it started to become too much of the same sexual crap and it started to lose that edge it used to have. The characters became too much like everyone else, and it was the threesome that really pushed it. It was a move that didn’t match the character, no matter if an alien took over his body and forced him into it.
I love every single character on Glee. Each one has their own special alcove in my heart. They are all equally obnoxious, and they’re all equally awesome. Every Tuesday there is a new episode, I download the new music from Itunes and Gleek out. Some of their covers are better, to me, than the original for many reasons, and mainly because I heard them do it first. It’s not like I’m a person that needs to be told someone premade it. I’m well aware. When someone is not in an episode, I miss them (like Puck last week). I find it annoying when someone writes about their least favorite character. Especially after all this stuff about bullying, you’d think people would not show their true colors (not purple) through telling what characters they don’t like. Tisk, tisk. Oh, I’m not talking about Kurt. If I were talking about Kurt, it would be me telling everyone that hooking him up with Fin, Puck or that new blond guy isn’t creative. It’s just horny and lying. Just sayin’…
Glee has taken that spot from Gossip Girl, and rightfully so. The entire show has more creative juices than a one-night stand with Chuck can come up with. The photos are not morally terrible. I understood the concept the moment I saw them. My very first thought was Britney Spears' “Hit Me Baby One More Time” and when I read that that was the general idea, I laughed. However, my disappointment comes from the fact that a creative show like Glee would do a photo shoot that lacked any sense of creative thinking. It’s been done in men’s fantasies and porn since the dawn of schoolgirl outfits and piggy-tails; what about it is creative?
Oh, shocker…GQ defends their lack of thinking and creative ingenuity.
The Parents Television Council must not be watching much TV these days and should learn to divide reality from fantasy,” Jim Nelson, editor-in-chief of GQ, said. “As often happens in Hollywood, these ‘kids’ are in their twenties. Cory Montieth’s almost 30! I think they’re old enough to do what they want.”
[From The Insider via The Huffington Post] -- I hate the Huffington Post, so they get credit, but not a hyperlink. It’s too much trouble. Yes it is. Don’t argue with me.
Keyword “Fantasy”. What horndogs, who should drop the "Gentlemen's" from their title and just put an M up there and allow people to think it means Men’s, and don’t give them a helping hand in what it really means, because then it shifts into a totally different kind of magazine.
If anyone is smart (and the next photographer who takes it upon themselves to shoot with Glee should be, as well as creative) they’ll read the last two sentences from Agron's blog and take a BIG, FAT hint at what will sell more than GQ’s edition of Masturbation Quarterly…sorry…totally confused fantasy with reality.
Those are all characters we’ve played for this crazy job, one that I love and am so fortunate to have, each and every day. If you asked me for my dream photo shoot, I’d be in a treehouse, in a wild costume, war-paint and I’d be playing with my pet dragon. Until then…..
Catch that? The important part has to do with…well, if you can’t pick up on what’s the important part then you’re the type of personality that’s uncreative and should work for GQ. Oh and not to mention, the most important thing that one should always remember…they’re actors. Therefore, when they do a photo shoot, they are professional enough to look unprofessional to some via acting. They’re used to this kind of publicity. They play people who are not them. What’s the big deal of doing the same in a photo shoot? It’s not. Sorry Parental W****s who ruin lives with lies, but GQ thanks you for giving their failing magazine a bit of bad publicity, only to maybe sell a few more bathroom editions.
Instead of putting up those photos for the umpteenth time, I’ve posted great renditions of Glee from DeviantArt. (There's also a Glee Club) Because that is creative stuff that GQ does not have, and why celebrate their boring lack when I can celebrate people with actual talent to represent a show that is one, if not the only, creative show on ALL of TV.
Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you Parental World of Hell for pointing out the problem with those photographs taken by the talent-less (thanks to the following also, don’t let the hyphenated word hurt your feelers) GQ. Because without y’all, I wouldn’t have been able to find a blog by one of my star crushes, who is actually closer to my age and has to replace the married Carrie Underwood. I apparently have a thing for blondes. I didn’t realize that until just now. Ha, thanks for that too. Y’all have helped so much, but are so whacked in the head. I’ll leave you with this wisdom from Brittany.