Talk:Circuit party

Untitled
To the user who eliminated information about drug use and sex at circuit parties, can you explain why you took those parts out of the article? I am not the author of the original text in those sections, but both of them seem to be valid descriptors of what goes on at circuit parties. I've yet to hear of someone who denies that drug use and sex do not exist at circuit parties, and in fact that they are both (with dancing) anything less than a primary raison d'etre of circuit parties. Moncrief 00:48, Apr 2, 2004 (UTC)

Even More Odd....
...is that music and dance are left out. Despite what many (non-attendees) like to believe, the main emphasis at these events is music. Music then equals dance. To attribute sex and drugs to these events is a useless attempt and taking what occurs everywhere and focusing it on gay dance events. If you want a high incidence of sex and drugs, go to any online chat room, AOL, or internet sex site. Go to people's homes, bars, clubs, restaurants, streetcorners, or any place that more than 2 people tend to gather.

If you want to focus on some of the best mix music created, world reknowned DJs, extravagant shows, creative and cutting edges decorations, and more dancing in one night/weekend than you can imagine, then focus on Circuit Parties.


 * I listen to circuit party music, even though I am NOT gay. Gringo300 17:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

After reading this article, I still don't have a great deal of an idea what an attendee of a circuit party would see, although I think I've learned about the scene in general, if not clinical detail. --Jmccorm 11:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

famous to whom?
The circuit scene is sub-cultural. Those within the sub-culture fail to see that their DJ's are not "world-famous". Yet, given that people travel around the world to hear these DJ's sets, does that not make them famous. Even first time party goers often know the names of the DJ's they are there to see before they truly understand what the party is like.

Genesis, Animosity, Revelation
In the late eighties and early/mid-nineties, circuit parties were largely the domain of the affluent, muscular, educated and well-traveled. At the very least, guys were either quite affluent or quite attractive. There were far fewer, such that one could quite conceivably do the whole 'circuit,' though they didn't yet carry that name.

As the nineties progressed and AIDS awareness became celebrity-chic, the parties became more popular and commercialized. The advertisements were almost caricatures of the events without meaning to be. This seeming 'leisure class' would multiply as more and more gay men who were positive were living longer due to protease inhibitors. Thanks to these inhibitors and the activists, many could now go on disability for HIV even though they retained their strength to pump heavy iron and dance the night away. HIV and 'disability,' in affect, created so much of the growth of circuit parties. Suddenly these men had money and all the time to spend it. When they weren't partying, they had all the time for the gym... and all the money for multiple gym memberships.

This is, in large part, what circuit party culture has become.

Large numbers of gay men from their late-twenties to late-fourties equipped with time and money for such lavish events was bound to attract more mainstream attention, if even only mainstream gays.

Yes, they were fund-raisers, but they were raising funds for the very disease many would contract at the parties, in part due to drug use. It became quite the paradox. Resentment was bound to surface, but instead of it rotating around irresponsibility and the abuse of disability, for gay men it seems more about the classic pretty/ugly, rich/poor rivalry. It's sour grapes to 'superiority'.

In the end, the parties are less about the fund-raising for the goers and more about music, sex and escape. They're about gay men who are attracted to handsome men. For those handsome enough to attract such lookers, the parties were fun. For those who weren't beautiful or couldn't afford the events, the parties were shallow and vapid even if they, too, were physically attracted to these guys.

In the 2000s circuit parties are anything from a right of passage for any young gay man, to 'so last millenium'. Whatever the case, the exclusivity is long gone and there seems to be one every week. What's more interesting is seeing how this first wave of out-of-the-closet, beautiful, affluent gay men who survived AIDS is living. These 'founders' didn't expect to be around very long yet their 'party until you drop' culture shaped circuit parties - for those who were perfectly healthy... and for those who, much to their surprise, would still be alive eighteen or so years after they were partying their lives away.

Some have returned to work and still sport physiques that would put a twenty-something to shame. Others, out of shape or over the scene, are hooked on Crystal 'NET-amphetamine' to fill their time. No dancing, no fund-raising, just cutting to the quick: sex and drugs. No personality or getting to know, just images, claimed stats on the Internet and drugs to allow them to skip the 'getting to know' process. These are gross generalizations, but do indeed make up a large percentage of former 'circuit boys'.

HIV had most gay men believing the end was near anyhow. Easy disability stripped many men of any sense of responsibility and provided them with nothing to do and all the money and time in the world to do it. Though not all or even most of these men were on disability, their seemingly care-free spirit shaped circuit party culture. Most of those that were POZ had no idea they'd still be around twenty years later... with nothing to do and very little to account of their years of partying.

As for the current generation, the parties are as drug-fueled as any other party, but not everyone does or needs to get high to participate and have a good time. To demonize these parties and the party goers wouldn't be fair. As they are now so commercial, they far more resemble a typical, urban, gay dance club on holiday weekend.

To the original post - I find this such an odd question. "Why were the drug references removed?" Because they don't apply. Why? What if this was the entry on, say, a wedding reception. Image that in the description of "Wedding Reception", among all the details, is a paragraph, of equal weight, that talks about how all weddings have alcohol and cocaine use and abuse. That is a salient point of a Wedding Reception? No, it is not. It may be true, but it is so irrelevant to the topic, that it is absurd.

The main points that should be discussed are: - Music - Dance - Freedom of Expression - Group Dynamics - Generational Knowledge - Sexual Aspecs

Is that ignoring the drugs? No. But "the drug issue" is something that transcends Circuit Events. It exists online, at home, at the clubs, on the streets, and, yes, at Wedding Receptions. So, discuss it under the heading of "Drug Use/Abuse", not Circuit Parties.
 * the reference to drug use at wedding receptions perhaps proves the point, that in that culture drug use is common everywhere? even at wedding receptions, yet to me it seems very unusual that a wedding reception would have any drug use at all! Mathmo Talk 00:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

As a health care professional for the last 30 years, most gay health conferences I've attended that discussed circuit parties did in fact discuss the health consequences for many of those attending: extensive illicit drug use (mentioned elsewhere in this discussion) in conjunction with erectile dysfunction medications (such as Viagra), and the resultant dehydration, disruption of sweating to cool overheated dancers, multiple unsafe sexual activities, and hearing loss from loud music. Many medical teams staffing such activities had ear plugs as well as condoms available. UNLIKE wedding parties, or "social networking sites" like Adam4Adam, Manhunt, et al., attendees were often encouraged and enabled to do risky things with large numbers of men. Similar, but definitely different! International Mr. Leather (IML) in Chicago is similar to circuit parties in this regards. In any event, I do think that a rational discussion about these health consequences does warrant discussion here. Articles have been published in medical journals regarding such consequences, and therefore justifies such inclusion. Not to disparage the "culture" of circuit parties, but to refine the focus to include a rational discussion of health consequences affecting some of the participants.

76.229.195.22 (talk) 19:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)Mark P. Behar, PA-C76.229.195.22 (talk) 19:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Do the critics get to define us?
It's interesting to me that the critics of the Circuit feel like they have the right to define who we are. For example, I have strong feelings about the evil of the Catholic church. If you look at their history over all they have created as much death and injustice as they have good. Yet would I feel that I have the right to edit a wikipedia page about the Catholic Church to add this kind of detail? No. They get to define who they are, not their detractors.

I feel like we need to own up to own up to some of the issues that swirl around the Circuit. But that is not what defines the Circuit. And the idea that Circuit is responsible for increases in HIV transmission is absurd. There is clearly a link between meth and HIV transmission. But is the Circuit the primary place where this link exists? I think not.

The meth epidemic swept across the gay community. On the Circuit there were factors that made it hit harder than in many corners of the community. But meth is essentially a non-social drug. Those that get hooked on it, especially those that are hooked because of a sex-meth linkage, quickly lose the desire to attend events like Circuit parties. They are far more likely to sit at home alone cruising for the next hook-up on-line. I see the influence of meth on the Circuit fading and this is why there is a rebound in party attendence.

I edited the main listing to reflect these thoughts. (posted by User:Stevenoiz)

Opening Paragraph References Specifics Too Early?
I refer to this phrase: "...in the carefree days after police abuse and before the beginning of the health crisis." Huh? What is all of this about THE health crisis? It doesn't make sense as you read it. Only when you read on in the next paragraph and it talk about gay men, you go, "Oh! That health crisis. That is what they were talking about." --Jmccorm 11:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Category is up for delete
as "trivial" Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_22 Scarykitty 14:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

unnecessarily judgemental:
"Unfortunately, it has seemed to emulate illegal Raves in that respect."

is the word "illegal" necessary? seems to deride raves as something no one would ever want to have anything to do with.

64.121.194.115 21:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I presume yes, as not all raves are legal. and there are differences between legal and and illegal ones. Mathmo Talk 00:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Added references
Added references, brought article text in line with references, removed "needs references" tag. We still have some "citation needed" sections; those need cites or they have to go. --John Nagle 20:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * We need more cites for the paragraphs with weasel words, per WP:WEASEL. There's too much uncited "Many believe", "Others believe", etc. --John Nagle 18:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Deleted paragraphs mentioned above, as commentary or original research. Left the "Background" section intact, although the history needs more citations. --John Nagle 05:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Analysis without factual basis.
Consider the following passage:

'Many in the gay community express extremely negative and judgmental attitudes toward those who attend circuit parties, often calling them "vapid tweekers" and making a variety of broad generalizations concerning the degree of promiscuous sex and drug use that takes place among party attendees. These attitudes generally tend to emerge out of an oversimplified view of what the parties consist of and of the people who attend them, and often out of a serious case of "sour grapes" because they're either too ugly or too fat to measure up to the handsome, muscular men who tend to be circuit parties' most visible participants. Circuit parties frequently host celebrity performers or headliners, usually gay icons.'

The bolded text is clearly the opinion of the author. Are there any reputable studies (any studies at all??) the author can cite which offer evidence of this assertion? Until such evidence is offered, the passage should be deleted or it should read:

Some have said that these attitudes emerge out of an oversimplified view of what the parties consist of. Others have asserted that opponents from within the gay community are jealous of the physical handsomeness of some of the partygoers most visible participants. Detractors counter that such 'responses' are themselves demonstrative of unsophisticated thought, and serve to confirm their assessments of the events.

Seriously though: The cattiness should be deleted. Simply replace the bolded text with "Party advocates counter that these attitudes generally tend to emerge out of an oversimplified view of what the parties consist of and of the people who attend them." and then cite the source of both assertions (for example, journalist's stories which state that these are the kinds of attitudes observed). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.71.187.240 (talk • contribs)
 * "Some have said" and similar phrases are "weasel word" phrases, and should not be used. See WP:WEASEL. The "background" paragraph needs cites to specific sources.  --John Nagle 16:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Questionable external link
The list of external links at the bottom of the "Circuit Party" article contains "Boyscape.com". This site may have its place here but certainly not at the top. Its content is obsolete. The leading circuit party sites are JustCircuit.com, PartyList.com, PartyFinder.com and CircuitPartyInsanity.com.

As reference you can ask major players in this field like these fund raiser groups:

- http://www.sapphirefund.org/sponsors.php

- http://www.cherryweekend.org/corporatepartners.shtml

- http://www.whiteparty.org/sponsors.html

- http://www.bbcm.org/bb2007/fr_home.html

- http://www.winterparty.com

Or major party promoters like:

- http://www.jeffreysanker.com

- http://www.onemightyweekend.com

Cheers,

Rodolphe Paccard

http://www.partylist.com/contact

PartyList.com Owner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.82.120.92 (talk) 08:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Deleted all the advertising-type links. Too promotional for Wikipedia. --John Nagle (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed, and honored that JOHN NAGLE even looked at this entry.  With commentary and discussion that occurred at the start of the circuit through now, how best to provide that type of external link to archived issues of Circuit Noize?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steveski (talk • contribs) 02:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's probably better to start from a reliable source like "On Gay Circuit, the Party Never Ends", from the New York Times. Otherwise we have either original research or advertising problems.  --John Nagle (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Music & DJ's
I recently attended my first circuit party, and I noticed that they played a very specific type of music that is enjoyed by a very particular subculture. I came to Wikipedia hoping to learn more about it, because I'd like to describe it to my friends, but this article includes almost no information about this genre of music. In my ignorance, I would describe it as "electronic music," although I don't know if it would be called house or industrial or jungle or techno or something else. (I'm just throwing around words that I've heard. I don't know what they mean.)

It seems to me that the music and the DJ is a central, defining aspect of a circuit party. Am I wrong? Would it be possible for anyone to add some relevant information about the genre of music, or the kind of DJ's, to be found at a circuit party?

166.77.6.4 (talk) 01:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)KidBohemia

I started a music group on Facebook.. It is "Morning/Sleaze music past and present" This particular breed of music mostly began with The Saint Nightclub I believe..It is perhaps my favorite music at a circuit event. DJ Mark Vallese described it perfectly; what's the difference between "morning music" and "sleaze"? If you ask 100 people this question, you'll get 100 different answers. The term "sleaze" has been around since the 70's and is most commonly used to describe the down tempo music that was played toward the end of the night (or the end of the party). It's usually very melodic and pretty. Most of the songs were vocal pieces with a few notable exceptions. The lyrics tended to be very emotional in one way or another, often describing the joys of love,or the pain of losing it.

Sexual overtones in the lyrics don't automatically classify a song as sleaze. Sleaze lyrics tended more toward love and emotion rather than blatant sexuality. There are some exceptions to that rule, let's not forget Donna Summer's nearly 14 minute long orgasm in "Love To Love You Baby"! There were a few creative DJ's who would take a song that wasn't sleaze and turn it into one by playing a 45rpm pressing at 33 1/3. Two songs that come to mind,that worked perfectly when played that way, were "Souvenirs" by Voyage and "Magic Bird Of Fire" by The Salsoul Orchestra. Unfortunately, true "sleaze" music is mostly a thing of the past. The few new, or recent songs that could fit in that category are now usually classified under the much broader term "morning music".

In the early to mid 80's the term "sleaze" started to fade out, to be replaced with the much broader term of "morning music". While this was still the music played toward the end of a club night or party, "morning music" did not describe a specific genre of songs like "sleaze" did. The term started describing the "type" of music that was played at a certain time or part of the night, rather than describing the actual "sound" or "feeling" of an individual piece of music. One way to put it is that all "sleaze" music can be classified as "morning", but not all "morning" music can be classified as "sleaze". While the term became much broader, it started encompassing music with a faster beat and also music with a darker, more electronic sound to it. This also coincided with the demise of "live" instruments being used in making most dance music. One thing that didn't change a whole lot was the use of vocals in a majority of the music, but the lyrics often became lighter, with less of an emotional punch to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.44.52 (talk) 21:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Circuit party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080809072139/http://www.loveball.info/ to http://www.loveball.info/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

NPOV
NPOV dispute [-List of Current Circuit Parties: One Magical Weekend] The notes for this party seem biased. Almost as if it's advertising.