[wisp]

http://www.autostrad...-weirdos-31525/

I thought this was a really interesting article. Personally, I like Taylor Swift's music a little bit - she's not one of my ultimate favourite singers and her songs are pretty fluffy, but sometimes that's what I feel like listening to. But the author of the article does have a good point about Swift embodying the image of the eternally-virginal damsel in distress, employing the oppressive Madonna/Whore dichotomy, and being horribly unoriginal with the themes of her music and videos.

Here's a helpful chart taken from the article:



One of the points from the article that particularly ruffled my feathers was the mention of a line from one of Swift's songs: “Abigail gave everything she had to a boy, who changed his mind, and we both cried.” I think that songs like this do a serious disservice to females by implying that our virginity should be the only thing that is important to us. Her hymen was "everything she had"? I completely understand being protective of your sexuality and I even understand the desire to wait until marriage to enter into a physically intimate situation with someone - but I think we should be way past the point where "slut-shaming" (intentional or not) should be accepted by mainstream society.

Anyway. Read and discuss. Have fun. XD

[Rhiannon]

I think by "everything she had" meant her heart more than anything.. especially if they were only "15". Her music is geared to the younger ages and personally I think younger ages should be taught to wait. Then when they're old enough to actually understand what happens and what could happen it's okay to tell them whatever. Personally waiting for marriage isn't my thing.. but I don't know.. maybe it should be taught strongly to younger people?

I love Taylor Swift, but I don't read into her music. Reading into anybody's music always makes a mess of things, especially if you do it too much because then you just start to look for bad things and make normals things worse. She has a wonderful voice and is fun to listen to.

[Hana-Nezumi]

I think it says a lot that even I, a fan of the Disney Princess franchise, don't like the lyrics in Taylor Swift's songs. They're overly saccharine, superficial, and present a bastardized image of romance that isn't even close to the real thing. Bleh.

[Chief Fire Storm]

She. Cannot. Sing.

[wisp]

Rhiannon, on 08 February 2010 - 06:49 PM, said:

I think by "everything she had" meant her heart more than anything.. especially if they were only "15". Her music is geared to the younger ages and personally I think younger ages should be taught to wait. Then when they're old enough to actually understand what happens and what could happen it's okay to tell them whatever. Personally waiting for marriage isn't my thing.. but I don't know.. maybe it should be taught strongly to younger people?

I love Taylor Swift, but I don't read into her music. Reading into anybody's music always makes a mess of things, especially if you do it too much because then you just start to look for bad things and make normals things worse. She has a wonderful voice and is fun to listen to.

I suppose it could be taken that way, but going from my past personal experience as part of the religious culture in which she was raised, I'm inclined to take "everything she had" as a reference to virginity; in the group I was part of, we pretty much DID think that a good bit of a woman's self-worth was inextricably linked to her sexual purity. I'm all for encouraging kids and teens to be abstinent until they're emotionally ready for it (whether that point comes at marriage or before), but not at the price of shaming kids (usually girls) who do have sex. Implying that virginity is "everything" for a girl leads to the notion (conscious or unconscious) that any girl who gives that up is either slutty or is somehow weak or helpless for letting a boy pressure her into sex.

Also, I'm not sure why some people think she is such a terrible singer. Granted, I never watched her season of Idol so I've never heard her sing live, but the stuff I've heard on the radio doesn't sound horrible to me. Like I said before, aside from my issues with her "helpless little boy-crazy girl" lyrics and public image I actually like her voice.

[Chief Fire Storm]

The reason she doesn't sound terrible on the radio is because she uses Autotune.

[Rhiannon]

I didn't think of it that way. I guess it's difficult for me to understand because I have zero religious background. In that case, then yeah I'm a little disapointed too I guess. Oh boo.. see this is why I don't look into lyrics.. too much feelings places into things.

But she can still sing.. and it is quite good at it .

[wisp]

Oh dear. XD

And I just found out that she apparently wasn't on Idol, contrary to what I've been hearing. I was wondering how someone who has to use Autotune could've gotten far in that show.. guess that's my answer. XD

[Selena]

Playing devil's advocate, to a small extent.


The traditional, innocent women of the world are facing the same sort of backlash that 'independent' women of the past used to deal with. Society has flipped, essentially. There's nothing really wrong with being pure and sweet. Being traditional doesn't automatically mean you lack self-confidence or self-respect, just as being independent doesn't mean you have to screw every human in sight just because you can (which is what the other camp in pop music tries to highlight).

Being independent means taking care of yourself, not letting people walk all over you, and not giving a fuck about what anyone else might think.

Taylor is obviously not dependent on anyone financially - if she were the stereotype of a demure super-Christian housewife, she would have just gotten married instead of focusing on a professional singing career. She had a dream. She chased it. She got it. Success. Now she's got enough money to support herself for the rest of her life. She has to know that she's being criticized by more feminist types for the message of her songs, but she clearly doesn't care enough about what others think to stop.

As that's essentially independence, the real argument does come back to her values. Placing so much value on virginity, being innocent, being demure and 'meek', being a traditional Christian, etc. She flies in the face of what's normal and cool. Surprise, surprise - she's getting made fun of for it.

Some girls simply do not want to be high powered CEOs or flaunt the fact that they can have lots of sex. Some women (or men, for that matter) are naturally on the shy and submissive side. It doesn't even always have to do with upbringing. Sometimes it's just the way you are. Some women want to be housewives and mothers and have little interest in work. Being forced to stay home with the kids and play housewife to a domineering husband is obviously bad. Doing so of your own free will? Hey, different strokes for different folks.

I say genuine 'liberation' is letting people have the freedom to live how they want, regardless of gender. Not fitting into a particular independent mold. Independence is a state of mind and being, not a particular lifestyle.

Quote

Wisp:

I suppose it could be taken that way, but going from my past personal experience as part of the religious culture in which she was raised, I'm inclined to take "everything she had" as a reference to virginity; in the group I was part of, we pretty much DID think that a good bit of a woman's self-worth was inextricably linked to her sexual purity.

Yeah, but that's you going off of your own experiences. Not knowing what she actually meant. I also took it the more emotional way.



- End Devil's Advocate mode -
- Begin real mode-

Of course, if you want to be demure and innocent, I cannot be held responsible for my dormant playground bully mentality. You guys are easy targets.

[smalls]

For my part I think she's just another in a long line of people selling their sexuality. As any political campaign strategist or PR worker or whatnot and they'll tell you: appealing to peoples emotions is always far more effective than appealing to their intellects, and lust is a particularly strong one. We know that all life on this planet shares at least one desire- to make more of itself through reproduction, and in humanity and other complex creature's cases, that means sex. The image might be dressed up in white, make lots of appeals to purity and wholesomeness, and swimming with concepts of morality, but in the end (to me at least, just my taste) it's all exactly the same. It's attractive and appeals to people who have traditional notions of sex, careers, and virginity.

I don't so much fault Swift for using her "talents" to feed the monkey, so to speak, because we all have to make a living (I say "talents" because as far as her singing goes, I can find you much better). I do, however, wish that people wouldn't fall quite so hard for the sort of saccharine fluff that passes for music these days...

[wisp]

I'm not making fun of her at all. I don't have a problem with her living that way if that's the lifestyle she wants to follow.

What I have a problem with is her using her music and/or celebrity status to promote the marginalization of women and women's sexuality. She claims to be out to help girls feel better about themselves, and I respect that - but I think she's going about it in the wrong way. Probably she doesn't know any better, and that's unfortunate. Intentionally or not, her music implies that men are shining beacons of perfection for lonely, outcast girls to strive towards and her videos tend to paint a picture of pure, white-clad, virginal Taylor as the heroine and bitchy-looking, made-up women in more revealing clothing (clearly intended to come off as less pure than our star here) as the wicked witch types who are keeping poor Taylor from her knight in shining armour. XD

Unintentional or implied slut-shaming is still slut-shaming and I don't see how that's supposed to make an insecure teenage girl feel any better about herself.

[Finbarr]

Selena, on 09 February 2010 - 05:33 AM, said:

The traditional, innocent women of the world are facing the same sort of backlash that 'independent' women of the past used to deal with. Society has flipped, essentially. There's nothing really wrong with being pure and sweet. Being traditional doesn't automatically mean you lack self-confidence or self-respect, just as being independent doesn't mean you have to screw every human in sight just because you can (which is what the other camp in pop music tries to highlight).

I don't think this is the point of the thread. It's not a question of which lifestyle is better. The issue is with people attacking one lifestyle, ie the slut shaming wisp was talking about. I've always thought the double standard for promiscuity was retarded, and holding onto the idea that "slutty" women should be ashamed of themselves, while sexually active guys are awesome doesn't do anyone any favours.

Selena, on 09 February 2010 - 05:33 AM, said:

As that's essentially independence, the real argument does come back to her values. Placing so much value on virginity, being innocent, being demure and 'meek', being a traditional Christian, etc. She flies in the face of what's normal and cool. Surprise, surprise - she's getting made fun of for it.

Again, it's not her values that are the problem. It's the way her lyrics attack the opposite values.

Selena, on 09 February 2010 - 05:33 AM, said:

I say genuine 'liberation' is letting people have the freedom to live how they want, regardless of gender. Not fitting into a particular independent mold. Independence is a state of mind and being, not a particular lifestyle.

I think we can all agree with this.

Selena, on 09 February 2010 - 05:33 AM, said:

Yeah, but that's you going off of your own experiences. Not knowing what she actually meant. I also took it the more emotional way.

Well, maybe Swift didn't intend to put those messages in her songs, but intent isn't the same as the end result.

[Selena]

Saying that you're "out to help girls feel better" is a cliche answer to an interview question - most singers say that. I highly doubt she's trying to indoctrinate girls or promote her way of life as if it's better. She's just singing what she knows. And what she knows is being shy and virginal and younger than she actually is. And when you're a lonely outcast, getting attention from the opposite (or same! ) sex can be a godsend. I assume the "slut-shaming" is meant to make the shy virginal girls feel better about themselves (not that I would exactly encourage people of either gender to be sluts?). In the same way that more liberated women feel better about themselves by "virgin-shaming." Which they do. It's the time-honored tradition of making fun of someone that isn't like you. As far as Swift's mindset is concerned, she's like a girl that's just entered puberty and discovered that she likes boys. Odd to us at our age, but hey, whatever.

Celebrities aren't automatically role models just because they're famous, and they shouldn't be held up to that standard. They're entertainers, not guardians. Lady Gaga's not exactly an idea role model either - the song's called Bad Romance for a reason, regardless of whether she has "'Cause I'm a free bitch, baby!" as a lyric. And she has also stated that she hopes to help outcast girls feel better.

Though out of curiosity, for as fiercely as you defend super-traditional virginal gushy teen Twilight, you have a problem with Taylor? It's like the same message, just in music form. And without Robert Pattinson. XP




edit: As for attacking values, Taylor's not exactly "attacking," just singing about a way of life that is in contrast to everybody else. Considering that, isn't every "screw everybody/get drunk/forget about responsibility/etc." song also an attack on traditional values? It works both ways. Why is it only a problem for people like Taylor?

[wisp]

I don't care if people make fun of Twilight itself; as I've said many times before I mainly just have issues with being made fun of because I liked the series. I've done my share of poking fun at Twilight, but yes I do take offence to being lumped into the category of "stupid teenagers who have never had a real boyfriend" just because I enjoyed reading the books. >.>

Anyway. Just because some people participate in "virgin-shaming" (which I don't), that doesn't mean that either it OR slut shaming is right. And it doesn't mean that I can't be annoyed with it. XD

[Steel Samurai]

I think most of you are missing the point. Not of the article, but of the entire grammy's/MTVA debacle.

Swifty (or "quicky" as she will henceforth be known) writes songs with boring cliched lyrics about highschool love. Fine. That's her business, she is -allowed- to have whatever stance she wants on virginity, the role of women, whatever. She is -allowed- to sing about that stance to millions of people, if she can get the radio time. Criticizing her sheerly for her stance (never, as far as I know, explicitly given in her music, the song quoted is obviously, to my eyes, about emotions, not virginity) is exactly like the fundamentalists criticizing musicians because they write anti-war songs. People don't regularly criticize bands like slayer or slipknot for having often deeply disturbing lyrics about rape and mass murder, neither, I think, should quicky be criticized just because you don't happen to agree with her outlook.

The real point, is that her music SUCKS. I'm no GaGa fan, or even too big a fan of Beyonce, but I will admit quite candidly that both of those ladies have more musical talent in their little fingers than quicky does in her entire virginal body. Live, according to all accounts, she cannot sing on key. What I've heard of her music is very musically predictable and boring. Her lyrics are poorly written, often borrowing, as the article states, from other songs. I understand that people like her. I understand that most tween girls have no taste whatsoever in what music is well crafted or not. But this is the fucking GRAMMY'S. Not "who has sold the most records" The judges of this are supposed to award the prizes based on musical criteria, not popularity. If there were justice in the musical world, the prize would've gone to the Yeah Yeah Yeahs for It's Blitz.

[wisp]

That.... wasn't really the point, Steel. XD I'm not criticising her for her stance on virginity, as I've already stated. But I am suggesting that she should try to promote her ideas without indirectly insulting women who choose different lifestyles.

I'm also not saying that she doesn't have the right to sing whatever she wants. I've seen you jump up before, whenever someone criticises a stance that falls in line with yours and say, "Well they had the right to do it!" as if I or whomever else was saying they didn't. But as much as she's allowed to sing songs that marginalise women, I'm also allowed to dislike those songs and express that displeasure. You don't have to agree with my opinion, but constantly telling me that they have the right to that opinion when I never stated otherwise really gets kind of old.

Prepare for a short trip into feminist territory. If you aren't interested, then I suggest you stop reading here. XD

There's this longstanding phenomenon known as the "Beauty Myth," which is basically a big corporate ploy for companies to profit off of making women feel inferior to each other so that they will go buy a bunch of products. It's recently been starting to include men as well, but women have been in its thrall for decades longer. The BM (yep, that's a pretty accurate abbreviation for it) pits women against each other, making us see each other as enemies to be torn down for whatever reason (that girl is too pretty, or that other girl isn't pretty enough, or that girl is a total slut because she has so many boyfriends, etc). I feel like the message that Swift is sending with her videos plays right into this, and as someone who poses herself as a role model who wants to help teenage girls (whether that's just a cliche interview answer or not, she still said it XD) I don't think this is the best way for her to promote self-confidence for girls.

At any rate, this isn't SRS BSNS and I'm not attacking her lifestyle choice. I'm just trying to have a hopefully interesting discussion about the implications of her music. It's not about her, or her background, or her choice to promote abstinence or whatnot so much as it is about how she goes about promoting it and what it says (explicitly or implicitly) about those who have a different lifestyle.

[Steel Samurai]

I wasn't actually responding directly to you, wisp, I think the last person who had posted when I started writing was fin, and by the time I finished two more people had posted So please don't take it as an attack on your views specifically. This:

Quote

What I have a problem with is her using her music and/or celebrity status to promote the marginalization of women and women's sexuality.

however, does seem to indicate a desire to abridge her right to promote whatever she wants to. After a reread of that paragraph I realize that's not what you intended, and apologize for misinterpreting things.

What I was trying to say in the second paragraph, which apparently didn't come out, is that I really, REALLY don't care about her views. Yes, I think that virginity for both men and women is something that shouldn't be lost without thinking long and hard about the consequences, but I really don't care what anyone else (Possibly with the exception of potential future romantic partners) thinks about the issue. I'm not looking to music or anything, really, to affirm my stance. But I digress.

I honestly don't see the "BM" as anything new. It wasn't created by corporations, it's been there among men and women since adam and eve, or a monkey first found a black rock in the middle of the desert, whichever explanation you prefer. There will always be jealousy, comparisons, divisions into groups based on physical appearance or money or virginity or whatnot, because that is human nature. Humans fracture. Humans look for way to feel better about themselves by excluding others. Corporations have simply learned to tap into that mindset and direct it towards things that will make them money. When quicky sings about the slut in a self pitying way, she's really just putting herself in a position higher than the other girl so she can feel good about herself. An Us vs. Them mentality. Is this a good attitude for girls to have? Of course not. But it's a very human paradigm, and I don't see it changing on a widespread basis any time soon. If not on sluttiness/virginity, a line will be drawn between early month period/late month period. Or hairy/not hairy (for men) It's human.

[smalls]

I think the real point is her lyrics and songs reflect and usually subtle and sometimes obviously anti-feminist mindset. Of course her singings not that good and her music is the same old and tired catchy tonal riffs, but honestly, there's tons of "bad" music out there that sells, because it's about appealing to the lowest common denominator. Follow the money, right? And her music and lyrics resonate with people; it's not her motives or rights to sing that are in question, but the content of her artistry.

[wisp]

Oh dear... I can just see the early period vs late period fights breaking out now...

*shakes head*

Anyway! Yeah I was confused as to why you seemed to interpret it that way when "grr I hate her opinions and she should shut up" is not what I was trying to say at all. XD Yeah, I agree that people will always tend to have an us vs them mentality.. but I still think it would be nice for self-proclaimed role models like quicky to be more mindful of it and try to discourage that mindset as much as possible.

Perhaps I can think of something more coherent to say later on when I'm less tired. For now... I'm going to shut my brain off as it needs to rest. XD

[Goose]

I'm loving this debate, because its really quite interesting. Now for me to play Devils Advocate.

Quote

Ke$ha - Blah Blah

Ba-da-da-da-ba-da blah, blah
Coming out your mouth with your blah blah blah
Just zip your lips like a padlock
And meet me at the back with the jack and the jukebox
I don't really care where you live at
Just turn around boy and let me hit that
Don't be a little bitch with your chit chat
Just show me where your dick's at

Is the stance that Ke$ha is making spreading the BM?

Quote

When asked about being a role model, Kesha said that people could look up to her in some aspects, but not everything. "I do think it's an important thing that happiness and the amount of money you have are mixed. There's absolutely no correlation, because the happiest times of my entire life have been when I didn't have $2."^[36]

Quote

She has expressed frustration at the double standard for the objectification of women in songs; in songs such as "Boots and Boys", she makes it a point to sing the same way men traditionally sang about women.^[3]

Does she spread the BM, or is she twisting the BM around in the ladies favor?

[Selena]

Fun times going to most recent post, skipping the middle part, and then wondering why everyone is suddenly talking about bowel movements.



The Beauty Myth is just capitalism trying to squeeze out more dollars. The only difference between it and any other business is that it revolves around one's appearance, which is easier to exploit. "You know, you have lovely eyes, but in order to really bring them out and look pretty, you should use this product" is essentially the same tactic as "to really enjoy your XBox, you should subscribe to XBox Live in order to play with all your other friends." It's basically what people in retail are trained to do.

I'd have to agree with Steel that that sort of behavior began in ancient times. Women have been dolling themselves up since the beginning, and, naturally, the people who opt not to do this are inevitably going to be seen as "less attractive" or "uninteresting" in comparison to the people who have invested a lot of (read: way too much) time into their looks. I think it's safe to say that young Egyptian girls were desperately trying to look like Nefertiti in the same way girls today strive to look like Beyonce or whoever.

It's all mating ritual stuff when you get down to the very core of it - like how genders of certain species have all these attractive but useless physical features. We just don't have the weird physical features, so we use makeup instead. Blush is obviously used to mimic a state of arousal, as the body flushes red due to increased bloodflow. Makeup makes you look younger, healthier, etc. Well, when applied right. The line between healthy and red light district hooker is a narrow one. And, it should be said, in some cultures men also wear makeup for the same purpose.

And since it's originally a mating thing, here comes the sense of competition. Getting the hottest girl is as much a priority for men as getting the hottest guy is a priority for women. Half of our known media - from ancient times to now - revolves around love and the competition it breeds with members of the same gender. Whether it's women being nasty to each other in the modern age or men having a joust in older times to determine who gets the lady, it is human nature. Well, animal nature in general. Women tend to be nastier when it comes to verbal attacks. Men just punch each other.



As for the Beauty Myth, I'd argue that it's less the makeup industry and more the lingering sexual repression from the Victorian Age and earlier. In Europe, women weren't exactly allowed to "enjoy" sex or essentially serve much of a purpose beyond baby machine. That's a long history to overcome, and I think it still lingers in the shadows. I think the legacy of all that repression is a notable decline in female self-confidence. Which we self-perpetuate through the generations at this point. Both genders are essentially free to do as they like. But the key difference between them is that men are more confident while the average woman is more neurotic and self-conscious, likely from all those years of serving no purpose other than attracting men and bearing their children. Can't feel too good about yourself when that's all you can do. That's the real root of the problem. Not the marketing of makeup or beauty standards, but the fact that we're gullible and insecure enough to buy into it.

It's fully within our power to go "Meh, whatever" to that sort of stuff. But we don't.

It might be interesting to examine cultures that do have makeup and the like, but also have a more "pro-woman" or at least egalitarian attitude, and see if their women are equally insecure as ours. Tribal society, maybe. Women are more likely to have respectable positions there than most advanced nations. Or cultures where men also wore makeup, to see if they were just as insecure.

[wisp]

Yes, all of that (and more) is true, Lena. But I opted to go for a less in-depth post because I figured nobody really wanted to hear me prattle on about feminism. XD

The BM definitely has been around for ages (hence why I said it was "longstanding" when I brought it up XD) - it's part sexual repression, part moneymaking ploy, and a lot of "keeping women in their place." It thrives on making us feel insecure about ourselves, and even though we're free to ignore it, the hold it has on many or most of us is so strong that even when we realize that it's a crock of shit, it's still hard for us to effectively remove ourselves from its grasp. Magazines, celebrities, businesses, etc. are all controlled by it to some degree (for example, magazines for women are often forced to extol the virtues of beauty products that don't really make wrinkles go away, but do make your dollars go away... because if they don't, they will lose their ad funding from those companies). I may go more into that later if the thread goes more in that direction, but for now I'll go back and address Goose's post.

I don't have any idea who Ke$ha is, but anyone who uses a dollar sign in her name in place of an s is probably not going to be high on my list of favourite people. XD And, well.. yeah, from what you've posted it seems she's doing the same thing to men that the BM has traditionally done to women. Yeah, she's objectifying them and making them out to be sex objects. I definitely respect her desire to fight back against the objectification of women, but I don't necessarily think that objectifying men in the same way is the right way to go about it. I mean, I have little to no problem with milder things that some people would say objectifies people - for instance, scantily clad men and women serving as eye candy in tv shows (to a point at least). I think the human body of either gender is beautiful and can be appreciated for its aesthetic value without turning people into objects... but singing songs about how persons of either gender just exist to fulfil our sexual desires just isn't my cup of tea, really.

[Egann]

Perhaps the real point here is that people have gotten so bored with the anti-heroine/ anti-Damsel-in-distress kind of women that ANY change feels like an improvement. So yes, it's a cliche...but in a very real sense, it's a cliche that scores well because it feels so out of place.

My English teacher had a theory he named after himself: The Bogg's Bouncing Billboard theorem.


...Just making Scientific Wild Ass Guesses. I don't listen to pop music.

[GuardianNinja]

Chief Fire Storm, on 08 February 2010 - 11:16 PM, said:

She. Cannot. Sing.

qft

[Moriatti]

Yo Wisp, I know you're having a discussion and all, and I'm gonna let you finish, but "U GUISE" is the best topic of all time.


Sorry, that was reactionary.

Seriously though, I find neither the words she sings, nor the music she sings them to that interesting.

Maybe that's just me.

[wisp]

You damn troll.

On a related note...


























God damn it, this makes me a troll too, doesn't it?

[Moriatti]

This thread is now about Kanye West manips.