No. You're waiting on somebody to bring up something else irrelevant to discuss because you look stupid.

You stated Christina didn't do gay anthems before Gaga. It is a blatant, undebatable, historical fact that any competent human being with a set of eyes, a calendar and the ability to read the names of months, days and years cannot dispute.

Beautiful was (and still is) considered & embraced by the LGBT community as one of the most important songs of all time and its impact began 10 years before Born This Way existed and is still present today.

Christina's song was naturally embraced by us without the tackiness... without the desperate lyrics and obvious motive to "release a gay anthem".

Now if you're one of the needy gays who interprets the term "gay anthem" as "must have the words gay, lesbian, transgendered, bi in the song... must specifically mention us... we deserve to be heard... Gaga was the first to use such blunt lyrics... blah blah blah" then by all means, I am wrong.

Otherwise.....

Back To Basics is riskier than everything Gaga has ever done. She released that album when everything on radio sounded like a Timbaland / Stargate production.

*rubs eyes* Are people in here REALLY trying to say that Born This Way wasn't risky?

Gaga released an album that sounded like it came straight from the 80s about gays, outcasts, death, immigration, lesbian affairs and Judas when everything else on the radio was about going out partying and getting drunk over a Dr Luke/Stargate production.

No it won't

obiviously. born this way is riskier than ever xtina album combined.

"No matter gay, straight or bi, lesbian transgendered life, I'm on the right track baby I was born to survive"

"I'm still in love with Judas, baby"

"I wanna love you, but something's pulling me away from you, Jesus is my virtue, and Judas is the demon I cling to"

In addition to looking like this



How was that not a risky way to start the era?

She'll never be able to approach the sheer riskiness of "Your Body" or "Let There be Love".