sparkindarkness (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sparkindarkness) wrote2010-03-03 04:05 pm
sparkindarkness) wrote2010-03-03 04:05 pm
Entry tags:
Wait? Porn?
Preface:
(I wrote this post some time ago and when I actually got round to posting it I realised the Daily Fail had just posted a huge great slut-shaming article about music videos being soft porn and how shameful all them women were being. It was replete with oh-so-wonderful subtexts of sexual woman being ‘weak’ and ‘submissive’ because no woman could ever be powerful and sexual and be in command of their own sexuality and like being sexual, right? And that women who were sexy and scantily dressed - even if they sang about and advocated strength and independence, were terrible role models. Aw hell no. Oh and Shakira is totally wrong because even though she focuses on children’s charities and education for girls she is like nearly NEKKED, ZOMG THE dirty dirty girl, so is totally WRONG *swoon* *faint* *hyperventilate*
Anyway, that article can be found here Y’know there could probably have been some good points in that article about the obsession with and focus on sex especially with children but it was generally lost in the slut-shaming and doom mongering and sounding like your granddad muttering about kids today.
In light of this article I held off posting because I didn’t want my post about sexuality in music to be related to or seen as connected with the Daily Mail’s hyperventilating panic gasping ‘please think of the children!’
And personally, I’m not fond of the preponderance of sexy images from the MUSICIANS in music videos because I think it distracts from the music to such a degree now that it’s almost impossible to be a successful pop singer, no matter how perfect your voice is, if you don’t have a sexy body as well. Which is think is a shameful waste of amazing talent. Now on with the show, as it were)
Moderately recently I saw linked one of Lady Gaga’s music videos For her song “Teeth.” I have had to review it on several occasions to collect my thoughts. Many many occasions. In fact, I feel the need to watch it again now to make sure my thoughts are clear.
There, back. Wait... one more time.
*Ahem* yes. It is hotter than a hotter thing with extra hotness (Possibly NSFW depending on how awesome your work is).
Stay with me, there is actually a point other than my drooling. Really. Anyway, while many (female or gay male) friends of mine have been joining me in their... extensive study of this video I was surprised that some gaped in horror that Lady Gaga had made a music video that was *gasp* gay porn!
(By the way, I think I deserve a small prize for not replying with “oh silly straight person, THAT’S not gay porn *LINK* is gay porn! See? You can tell by all the cock“).
And I scratched my head at this because, yes it’s certainly sexy, but porn? No more so than any number of videos that had passed by their blissfully unaware attention. I mean, these were not just people who were happy to not even blink at:
Britney Spears Toxic (embedding disabled)
But weren’t even moved to comment by:
Which, it has to be said, are rather more porny than Lady Gaga’s “Teeth.” (And yes, I do like all of the above songs. Yes, I like the cheesy, sue me).
Which, I think, is a rather classic example of heteronormative thinking. (I think it’s also a liberal helping of sexism since women are allowed to be sexual objects but not the mens! And certainly not the mens without a woman present)
They weren’t offended or angered by the gay sexiness, I hasten to add. They didn’t run from, the room screaming “my eyes have been defiled by teh gay!!!“ they weren’t noisily sick in a corner. They didn’t say things like “that’s nasty.“ But they did consider it to be more explicit than, in my opinion, the straight (or faux-lesbian) equivalent. It’s similar to the attitude we saw over the Adam Lambert kafuffle - relatively tame sexual acts are considered more explicit when done by gay men.
Which is a point. So long as gay male sexuality is considered inherently “ickier” than sexuality aimed at straight men (women, faux lesbians et al) then gay sexuality will continue to be depicted as somehow bad and wrong - which makes us bad and wrong by inference.
And I have not made this post purely because I am childishly pleased with my embedding skills. No no I haven’t.
(I wrote this post some time ago and when I actually got round to posting it I realised the Daily Fail had just posted a huge great slut-shaming article about music videos being soft porn and how shameful all them women were being. It was replete with oh-so-wonderful subtexts of sexual woman being ‘weak’ and ‘submissive’ because no woman could ever be powerful and sexual and be in command of their own sexuality and like being sexual, right? And that women who were sexy and scantily dressed - even if they sang about and advocated strength and independence, were terrible role models. Aw hell no. Oh and Shakira is totally wrong because even though she focuses on children’s charities and education for girls she is like nearly NEKKED, ZOMG THE dirty dirty girl, so is totally WRONG *swoon* *faint* *hyperventilate*
Anyway, that article can be found here Y’know there could probably have been some good points in that article about the obsession with and focus on sex especially with children but it was generally lost in the slut-shaming and doom mongering and sounding like your granddad muttering about kids today.
In light of this article I held off posting because I didn’t want my post about sexuality in music to be related to or seen as connected with the Daily Mail’s hyperventilating panic gasping ‘please think of the children!’
And personally, I’m not fond of the preponderance of sexy images from the MUSICIANS in music videos because I think it distracts from the music to such a degree now that it’s almost impossible to be a successful pop singer, no matter how perfect your voice is, if you don’t have a sexy body as well. Which is think is a shameful waste of amazing talent. Now on with the show, as it were)
Moderately recently I saw linked one of Lady Gaga’s music videos For her song “Teeth.” I have had to review it on several occasions to collect my thoughts. Many many occasions. In fact, I feel the need to watch it again now to make sure my thoughts are clear.
There, back. Wait... one more time.
*Ahem* yes. It is hotter than a hotter thing with extra hotness (Possibly NSFW depending on how awesome your work is).
Stay with me, there is actually a point other than my drooling. Really. Anyway, while many (female or gay male) friends of mine have been joining me in their... extensive study of this video I was surprised that some gaped in horror that Lady Gaga had made a music video that was *gasp* gay porn!
(By the way, I think I deserve a small prize for not replying with “oh silly straight person, THAT’S not gay porn *LINK* is gay porn! See? You can tell by all the cock“).
And I scratched my head at this because, yes it’s certainly sexy, but porn? No more so than any number of videos that had passed by their blissfully unaware attention. I mean, these were not just people who were happy to not even blink at:
Britney Spears Toxic (embedding disabled)
But weren’t even moved to comment by:
Which, it has to be said, are rather more porny than Lady Gaga’s “Teeth.” (And yes, I do like all of the above songs. Yes, I like the cheesy, sue me).
Which, I think, is a rather classic example of heteronormative thinking. (I think it’s also a liberal helping of sexism since women are allowed to be sexual objects but not the mens! And certainly not the mens without a woman present)
They weren’t offended or angered by the gay sexiness, I hasten to add. They didn’t run from, the room screaming “my eyes have been defiled by teh gay!!!“ they weren’t noisily sick in a corner. They didn’t say things like “that’s nasty.“ But they did consider it to be more explicit than, in my opinion, the straight (or faux-lesbian) equivalent. It’s similar to the attitude we saw over the Adam Lambert kafuffle - relatively tame sexual acts are considered more explicit when done by gay men.
Which is a point. So long as gay male sexuality is considered inherently “ickier” than sexuality aimed at straight men (women, faux lesbians et al) then gay sexuality will continue to be depicted as somehow bad and wrong - which makes us bad and wrong by inference.
And I have not made this post purely because I am childishly pleased with my embedding skills. No no I haven’t.