Watching last week's Raw and Smackdown I can't help but wonder why exactly Kelly Kelly is feuding with Beth Phoenix and Natalya. Sure, on TV and on Twitter, all three ladies have pushed the idea that Beth and Natalya are real women and not skinny barbies. Problem is, other than weight, there's little difference between the three.
Clearly, all three are blond and beautiful. Strangely, both Beth and Natalya, when not wrestling, dress very similar to Kelly (dresses, expensive shoes). The girls even wear bright colored lipstick. I'm not quite sure how they can claim to be so different from Kelly when they're clearly told to be the same.
WWE won't allow their women to be different outside of hair color. That makes feuds like this utterly ridiculous. In fact, you can boil this feud down to Skinny Barbie vs. Fat Barbie. That's basically what Michael Cole said on commentary last Friday when he called Beth and Natalya "full-figured women," which as any man knows is code for fat chicks.
Perhaps if Beth and Natalya weren't instructed to dress and look like Kelly this feud would make sense. Instead, it's three hot chicks fighting over whether it's better to be fat or skinny. Ironically, last time they did this fat vs. skinny feud, the face was the "fat" one (Mickie James). Now, the "fat" chicks are the heels. Either way, it's all about looks with WWE.
It's quite sad.
For the record I don't think Beth, Natalya or Mickie are/were fat. WWE wants you to think so.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
What is a Britney Spears Fan?
You may be tempted to think Britney fans are human. They are not. They're robots programmed to function a certain way. And like all robots, there have been flaws along the way. Most models get updated every year, but there are some older models still floating around.
There are roughly 10 or so different types of fan, such as:
Voting Bots
Stan Bots
Arguing Bots
Buying Bots
Promoting Bots
Artistic Bots
Singing Bots
Dancing Bots
Crazy Bots
Obsessive Bots
As I said, each bot receives an upgrade yearly, though flaws pop up now and then. Voting Bots were programmed to vote for Britney in any and all situations, i.e. they'll vote for her video on VH1 and they'll vote for her to win a poll. Voting Bots were also equipped with the ability to make threads in forums asking others to vote as well.
Stan Bots were programmed to defend Britney in every and all situations. If a Gaga fan says something bad about Britney, a Stan Bot will immediately respond with one of a couple programmed phrases: "Godney!" "Your fav could never," "Britney slays your favs," and the reciting of statistics like albums sold. Unfortunately, do to all the energy to run, the Stan Bot breaks down quite frequently and often needs replacing. Newer Stan Bots come equipped with the ignore function allowing them to ignore any and all facts about Britney that don't promote her awesomeness.
Arguing Bots were programmed to start fights with other fans and get under their skin. These bots will routinely and randomly post topics that have nothing to do with anything other than starting a Britney war. They come equipped with such phrases as "Britney > Gaga," "Irrelevantina," and "Britney invented . . ." The major flaw with the Arguing Bot is how they can sometimes, in trying to argue for Britney, use stats that make her look bad. Newer models now have an off switch, though locating it is nearly impossible.
Buying Bots simply exist to buy everything Britney makes, whether it be music, movies, clothes or fragrances. A small defect occurs when the Buying Bot overbuys causing it to crash.
Promoting Bots are similar to Buying Bots, except they encourage other people to do the buying. These bots also promote Britney's appearances and concert dates. A popular feature with these bots is the "Download [insert product here] week" where they will encourage people to download a certain item, like Britney's Blackout, for an entire week. A major flaw that has yet to be corrected is shutting them up. They also tend to get hung up on certain items, asking you to buy something regardless of how old it is (such as Blackout).
Artistic Bots were designed to create blends, backgrounds, wallpapers and graphics. One problem is that these bots don't know what's good and what's bad.
Singing and Dancing Bots were designed to sing and dance. They post videos of themselves singing and dancing, talk about how they love to sing and dance, and encourage others to sing and dance. These bots are routinely upgraded with better singing and dancing skills; however, older bots with poor singing and dancing skills still exist. Beware.
Crazy Bots seem normal. They talk about Britney and love Britney like anyone else. However, Crazy Bots tend to overuse emoticons and exclamation points and words ending in -ney. These bots are programmed with phrases like "Assney," "Blondney," Danceney," "Liveney," and "Sexney."
Obsessive Bots are, quite simply, the worst. They talk only about Britney. They believe everything they hear. They bitch when things don't go the way they want. They own every piece of Britney merchandise available. These bots spout off opinions as fact. Example: "Britney's team is so stupid. Unusual You would have been a huge hit." Obsessive Bots love to tell you how it is. Example: "Free Britney. This conservatorship is bullshit." Avoid Obsessive Bots at all times. They are dangerous. A flaw occurs when you try to reason with the Obsessive Bot, because it will become a combination Stan Bot and Arguing Bot. It will spout phrases that make no sense like "Britney owns your life," "Britney owns your soul," and "jealous hater."
If you encounter a bot, please turn around and walk in the other direction. Don't make any sudden movements or that may cause them to activate.
There are roughly 10 or so different types of fan, such as:
Voting Bots
Stan Bots
Arguing Bots
Buying Bots
Promoting Bots
Artistic Bots
Singing Bots
Dancing Bots
Crazy Bots
Obsessive Bots
As I said, each bot receives an upgrade yearly, though flaws pop up now and then. Voting Bots were programmed to vote for Britney in any and all situations, i.e. they'll vote for her video on VH1 and they'll vote for her to win a poll. Voting Bots were also equipped with the ability to make threads in forums asking others to vote as well.
Stan Bots were programmed to defend Britney in every and all situations. If a Gaga fan says something bad about Britney, a Stan Bot will immediately respond with one of a couple programmed phrases: "Godney!" "Your fav could never," "Britney slays your favs," and the reciting of statistics like albums sold. Unfortunately, do to all the energy to run, the Stan Bot breaks down quite frequently and often needs replacing. Newer Stan Bots come equipped with the ignore function allowing them to ignore any and all facts about Britney that don't promote her awesomeness.
Arguing Bots were programmed to start fights with other fans and get under their skin. These bots will routinely and randomly post topics that have nothing to do with anything other than starting a Britney war. They come equipped with such phrases as "Britney > Gaga," "Irrelevantina," and "Britney invented . . ." The major flaw with the Arguing Bot is how they can sometimes, in trying to argue for Britney, use stats that make her look bad. Newer models now have an off switch, though locating it is nearly impossible.
Buying Bots simply exist to buy everything Britney makes, whether it be music, movies, clothes or fragrances. A small defect occurs when the Buying Bot overbuys causing it to crash.
Promoting Bots are similar to Buying Bots, except they encourage other people to do the buying. These bots also promote Britney's appearances and concert dates. A popular feature with these bots is the "Download [insert product here] week" where they will encourage people to download a certain item, like Britney's Blackout, for an entire week. A major flaw that has yet to be corrected is shutting them up. They also tend to get hung up on certain items, asking you to buy something regardless of how old it is (such as Blackout).
Artistic Bots were designed to create blends, backgrounds, wallpapers and graphics. One problem is that these bots don't know what's good and what's bad.
Singing and Dancing Bots were designed to sing and dance. They post videos of themselves singing and dancing, talk about how they love to sing and dance, and encourage others to sing and dance. These bots are routinely upgraded with better singing and dancing skills; however, older bots with poor singing and dancing skills still exist. Beware.
Crazy Bots seem normal. They talk about Britney and love Britney like anyone else. However, Crazy Bots tend to overuse emoticons and exclamation points and words ending in -ney. These bots are programmed with phrases like "Assney," "Blondney," Danceney," "Liveney," and "Sexney."
Obsessive Bots are, quite simply, the worst. They talk only about Britney. They believe everything they hear. They bitch when things don't go the way they want. They own every piece of Britney merchandise available. These bots spout off opinions as fact. Example: "Britney's team is so stupid. Unusual You would have been a huge hit." Obsessive Bots love to tell you how it is. Example: "Free Britney. This conservatorship is bullshit." Avoid Obsessive Bots at all times. They are dangerous. A flaw occurs when you try to reason with the Obsessive Bot, because it will become a combination Stan Bot and Arguing Bot. It will spout phrases that make no sense like "Britney owns your life," "Britney owns your soul," and "jealous hater."
If you encounter a bot, please turn around and walk in the other direction. Don't make any sudden movements or that may cause them to activate.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Britney's Fame is Bigger Than Your Fame
Britney Spears is so famous that she makes other people famous just by being associated with them. People still talk about Kevin Federline because of Britney. Hell, she's so famous, she made TWO other people famous through a third party. Just by being associated with Kevin, both Shar Jackson and Victoria Prince became famous.
Can you imagine that level of fame? Madonna, Lady Gaga and Christina Aguilera are all famous, but they don't make other people famous. That guy Gaga used to date who she wrote "You and I" about, does anyone ever talk about him? Christina's and Madonna's boyfriend, are they ever photographed without Christina or Madonna?
Britney has made the non-famous famous and the non-relevant relevant. Look what she did for Fred Durst. Hell, you could argue her alleged cheating on Justin Timberlake made him a superstar. Without that, there would have been no "Cry Me a River" song or video, which is what broke Justin big (not to mention the fact that he spoke about sleeping with her).
Her level of fame knows no bounds. Paris Hilton is one of the most written about and photographed women in the world. However, do you hear anything about her exes once the relationship is over? Her fame aura weakens the minute you're separated from her. With Britney, her fame is like a disease you can't cure. People still talk about Kevin and they've been divorced for nearly five years.
Think about it this way: with a normal celebrity, say Kim Kardashian, you're famous just by being next to her (in her aura). But the further away you two are, the more your fame weakens until people forget about you. With Britney, on the other hand, her fame attaches to you so that whether you're with her or not, you're still famous.
Maybe the ultimate sign her fame supersedes everything else in the world: the way she lived from 2004-2008 would have ended 99 percent of Hollywood careers (a quickie marriage and annulment, marrying someone no one ever heard of, giving up her career to have children, publicly breaking down, blowing her big comeback at the 2007 VMAs, etc.). But here we are, in 2011, and Britney is still making regular folk famous. Fans will go to her shows and be excited to meet her boyfriend. Literally, they will write, "OMG, I met Jason. It was so exciting." Like they were meeting Justin Bieber.
Some people just have it.
Can you imagine that level of fame? Madonna, Lady Gaga and Christina Aguilera are all famous, but they don't make other people famous. That guy Gaga used to date who she wrote "You and I" about, does anyone ever talk about him? Christina's and Madonna's boyfriend, are they ever photographed without Christina or Madonna?
Britney has made the non-famous famous and the non-relevant relevant. Look what she did for Fred Durst. Hell, you could argue her alleged cheating on Justin Timberlake made him a superstar. Without that, there would have been no "Cry Me a River" song or video, which is what broke Justin big (not to mention the fact that he spoke about sleeping with her).
Her level of fame knows no bounds. Paris Hilton is one of the most written about and photographed women in the world. However, do you hear anything about her exes once the relationship is over? Her fame aura weakens the minute you're separated from her. With Britney, her fame is like a disease you can't cure. People still talk about Kevin and they've been divorced for nearly five years.
Think about it this way: with a normal celebrity, say Kim Kardashian, you're famous just by being next to her (in her aura). But the further away you two are, the more your fame weakens until people forget about you. With Britney, on the other hand, her fame attaches to you so that whether you're with her or not, you're still famous.
Maybe the ultimate sign her fame supersedes everything else in the world: the way she lived from 2004-2008 would have ended 99 percent of Hollywood careers (a quickie marriage and annulment, marrying someone no one ever heard of, giving up her career to have children, publicly breaking down, blowing her big comeback at the 2007 VMAs, etc.). But here we are, in 2011, and Britney is still making regular folk famous. Fans will go to her shows and be excited to meet her boyfriend. Literally, they will write, "OMG, I met Jason. It was so exciting." Like they were meeting Justin Bieber.
Some people just have it.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Britney's History at the VMAs
It shouldn't be shocking that Britney Spears is being given a Lifetime Achievement Award by MTV since she's made so many iconic videos. Except that it is. Britney has received a total of four Video Music Awards in her 13-year career. To put that into perspective, Lady Gaga won eight awards . . . just in 2010. In 1987, Peter Gabriel won 10 and in 1996 and 2005, The Smashing Pumpkins and Green Day each won seven, respectively. Three other artists, Madonna, Fatboy Slim and R.E.M. all won six in one night.
For Britney to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award, you'd imagine she'd have made some amazing videos. Not according to MTV. Two videos have won her the four awards, "Piece of Me" in 2008* and "Womanizer" a year later. This year, the year she's being honored, she's up for two awards: Best Pop Video and Best Choreography. Britney's released three videos this year. In essence, MTV is saying Britney is a music video legend, while at the same time saying she's not that great. In fact, MTV even created a special category a couple years ago to give a video an award that never won one. Britney didn't win that, either.
I'm not suggesting Britney should win every award. But I find it odd that MTV is recognizing her on a show where they never recognized her. It would be like the Grammy's honoring someone they never gave a Grammy to.
So, MTV refuses to acknowledge Britney's greatness. However, they have no problems pimping her out when she's set to perform/appear on its show. Any year Britney is set to perform, the majority of the promotion is centered around her (and for good reason, because in 99, her first year as a major artist, the show did an 8.0 rating. Every year after that, the show's audience was either above10 million or right at it. When she stopped showing up in 2005, the ratings dropped precipitously and haven't seen 10 million until last year, though her comeback show in 2008 saw a 1.5 million boost from 2007). Any way you slice it, Britney equals ratings.
Unfortunately, those ratings haven't translated into wins. Britney was 0-16 before finally winning in 2008. She had become the Susan Lucci of the VMAs (even MTV started acknowledging it by asking, "Will this be the year Britney finally wins one?"). It wouldn't be foolish to think on a night where she's being honored she'd have one win locked up. Of course, this is MTV, after all, so it's quite possible Britney may have to sit there and watch other people accept her statutes (people she, like a majority of the viewing public, have never heard of). What's even funnier: her video for "I Wanna Go" just hit #1 on VH1s Top 20 countdown, yet that video has zero nominations.
In MTVs book, Lady Gaga should be receiving her tribute next year and Beyonce should have got one two years ago (to be fair, Beyonce should get one, eventually). It appears this tribute to Britney is MTVs mea culpa, its I'm sorry. Perhaps the company realize they should have given Britney many more moon men, but since time travel has not been invented, this is the next best option.
I guess it'll suffice.
*Sadly, many people feel she was handed three awards for that video because MTV wanted to jump on the comeback wagon. Therefore, you could argue she only earned one award, for "Womanizer" in 2009.
For Britney to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award, you'd imagine she'd have made some amazing videos. Not according to MTV. Two videos have won her the four awards, "Piece of Me" in 2008* and "Womanizer" a year later. This year, the year she's being honored, she's up for two awards: Best Pop Video and Best Choreography. Britney's released three videos this year. In essence, MTV is saying Britney is a music video legend, while at the same time saying she's not that great. In fact, MTV even created a special category a couple years ago to give a video an award that never won one. Britney didn't win that, either.
I'm not suggesting Britney should win every award. But I find it odd that MTV is recognizing her on a show where they never recognized her. It would be like the Grammy's honoring someone they never gave a Grammy to.
So, MTV refuses to acknowledge Britney's greatness. However, they have no problems pimping her out when she's set to perform/appear on its show. Any year Britney is set to perform, the majority of the promotion is centered around her (and for good reason, because in 99, her first year as a major artist, the show did an 8.0 rating. Every year after that, the show's audience was either above10 million or right at it. When she stopped showing up in 2005, the ratings dropped precipitously and haven't seen 10 million until last year, though her comeback show in 2008 saw a 1.5 million boost from 2007). Any way you slice it, Britney equals ratings.
Unfortunately, those ratings haven't translated into wins. Britney was 0-16 before finally winning in 2008. She had become the Susan Lucci of the VMAs (even MTV started acknowledging it by asking, "Will this be the year Britney finally wins one?"). It wouldn't be foolish to think on a night where she's being honored she'd have one win locked up. Of course, this is MTV, after all, so it's quite possible Britney may have to sit there and watch other people accept her statutes (people she, like a majority of the viewing public, have never heard of). What's even funnier: her video for "I Wanna Go" just hit #1 on VH1s Top 20 countdown, yet that video has zero nominations.
In MTVs book, Lady Gaga should be receiving her tribute next year and Beyonce should have got one two years ago (to be fair, Beyonce should get one, eventually). It appears this tribute to Britney is MTVs mea culpa, its I'm sorry. Perhaps the company realize they should have given Britney many more moon men, but since time travel has not been invented, this is the next best option.
I guess it'll suffice.
*Sadly, many people feel she was handed three awards for that video because MTV wanted to jump on the comeback wagon. Therefore, you could argue she only earned one award, for "Womanizer" in 2009.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Big Fat Shrimp (Feat. Tu-Na Fish)
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
Big fat shrimp
The big fat shrimp
I can be the lobster baby
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
I can be the lobster baby
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
I can be the lobster baby
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
I can be the lobster baby
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
You can be the shrimp
Hey
You see me trolling the floor
Hanging out with the plankton
I be avoiding the lure
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
And now
You see me up in the store
I was rocking the ocean
I just can't take it no more
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
Bigger, bigger
The shrimp is getting low
The shrimp is getting low
The shrimp is getting low
I-I-I-I-It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
Hey
You eat me out in the night
Put me in the pot
So I can cook alright
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
Yo
Take me off of your tray
I wanna have me a good time
Eat me right away
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
Yeah
Yeah
Yeah
Y'all better get ready for the haddock
For the haddock
For the haddock
Y'all better get ready for the haddock
For the haddock
For the haddock
Yo it's the haddock
Come and get some
Of the fish that's rocking your system
When you swallow it cause an addiction
If you're allergic better get a prescription
You know I keep the whole sea trippin
Fishermen sit and wait and listen
For the haddock
For the haddock
For the haddock
For the haddock
For the big big fat fat shrimp
You stuff it all in your face
Allergic and puke all over the place
Right now let's get crazy
Here we go
Here we go
Here we go
Everybody in the place get frantic
This shrimp right here's gigantic
Yo
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
It's getting bigger
The shrimp is getting bigger
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
I can be your lobster baby
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
You can be my shrimp
Thursday, August 11, 2011
This is Not For Britney
Baby, one more time. Rebellion. Intimidated. Toxic. And then we kiss. Now. Now. I'm a slave 4 u. Chaotic. Anticipating.
She's all I need.
She's all I need.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
(Real) Dirty Pop
I read in a newspaper (yes, they still exist) an etiquette column where the writer had less than flattering things to say about today's popular music. In fact, he said he scoured the entire Billboard Hot 100 and could find only two uplifting, positive songs: Bruno Mars' "Just the Way You Are" and Selena Gomez and the Scenes' "Who Says." The rest, he said, were vulgar and filthy. Actually, radio host Laura Ingraham said they were vulgar and filthy. He just agreed.
The writer specifically points out two songs as being most filthy: "Last Friday Night"by Katy Perry (or Katie Perry as he wrote) and "S&M" by Rihanna (and Britney Spears, if you prefer). There's no denying that he's absolutely right: on the surface both of those songs are filthy. Katy sings about dancing on table tops, taking shot, having a menage trois, etc. Rihanna sings about whips and chains, sex in the air and says "it's your turn to hurt me" (well, Britney says that in the remix).
Techincally, yes, they're both filthy, dirty, vulgar songs. And many other songs are, too: in "I Wanna Go" Britney says she's taking her freak out tonight, in "Blow" Ke$ha says "we're pretty and sick,"and in "Party Rock Anthem" LMAO says, well, I'm not sure but I bet it's dirty. However you look at it, pop music is filled with vulgarity. Thing is, it's always been that way.
Go back to the 80s when Madonna talked about being "touched for the very first time" and you'll find vulgarity there, too. Is a song called "Like a Virgin" any better than a song about getting drunk and making out? Not really.
The writer of the article said, "We don't need to know about every urge, intimate act, or private thing the singer does or fantasizes about doing," which is code for "tell us your innermost thoughts, so long as they don't involve sex or drinking." That's a nice sentiment, but the whole world can't be PG (or G) rated (I wonder how the writer would feel if he found out Selena recorded a song written by Britney. Probably horrified)
I'm all for censorship in certain areas; kids don't need to see and hear everything. But being offended or upset because some artists choose to sing about adult themes is ridiculous. Funnily enough, the title of the article is "Role models on the pop charts." Apparently, Katy and Rihanna aren't role models because they sing about sex and drinking. Never mind the fact that both women are very successful, self-made business women. The fact that they drink (maybe not Katy since her husband is a recovering alcoholic) and have sex and sing about it is irrelevant.
Let's also not forget that Rihanna was beaten by her boyfriend and instead of hiding in the shadows has not only continued her career, but openly talked about the incident. That seems like the kind of person to admire: strong-willed, independent, and tough (don't forget also, the picture of her beaten face was plastered all over the Internet).
I'm not suggesting a five-year old should be singing the lyrics to "S&M" or "Last Friday Night." However, vulgarity is everywhere: in movies, TV shows, and magazines. People should be allowed to share their urges and private thoughts.
Then there's the question of what is vulgar. If, for instance, Rihanna had thoughts about pounding Chris Brown into a pancake and decided to record a song about it, would that be considered vulgar even though most anyone would agree she has every right to feel that way? Or, instead, if Rihanna met a great guy and had thoughts about sleeping with him, would it be vulgar to share those thoughts?
We know the answer to the latter is yes; at least, we know Laura Ingraham and the author of the aforementioned article think so. We don't really know about the former. Truthfully, I don't think either is vulgar. We feel what we feel and art allows us to express that. What's the difference between art and vulgarity?
Is a picture of two people engaged in a sexual act more vulgar than the description of that act itself? Who decides that? I would assume the description is more vulgar, because with the picture you can see what you want to see and avoid what you don't. With the description, you hear whatever the describer is telling you whether you want to or not. Of course, I don't know if I'm qualified to make that distinction.
Rihanna, Katy and all the other artists topping the charts may be vulgar. It's their right as artists to express themselves however they choose - sex, drugs AND rock n' roll.
The writer specifically points out two songs as being most filthy: "Last Friday Night"by Katy Perry (or Katie Perry as he wrote) and "S&M" by Rihanna (and Britney Spears, if you prefer). There's no denying that he's absolutely right: on the surface both of those songs are filthy. Katy sings about dancing on table tops, taking shot, having a menage trois, etc. Rihanna sings about whips and chains, sex in the air and says "it's your turn to hurt me" (well, Britney says that in the remix).
Techincally, yes, they're both filthy, dirty, vulgar songs. And many other songs are, too: in "I Wanna Go" Britney says she's taking her freak out tonight, in "Blow" Ke$ha says "we're pretty and sick,"and in "Party Rock Anthem" LMAO says, well, I'm not sure but I bet it's dirty. However you look at it, pop music is filled with vulgarity. Thing is, it's always been that way.
Go back to the 80s when Madonna talked about being "touched for the very first time" and you'll find vulgarity there, too. Is a song called "Like a Virgin" any better than a song about getting drunk and making out? Not really.
The writer of the article said, "We don't need to know about every urge, intimate act, or private thing the singer does or fantasizes about doing," which is code for "tell us your innermost thoughts, so long as they don't involve sex or drinking." That's a nice sentiment, but the whole world can't be PG (or G) rated (I wonder how the writer would feel if he found out Selena recorded a song written by Britney. Probably horrified)
I'm all for censorship in certain areas; kids don't need to see and hear everything. But being offended or upset because some artists choose to sing about adult themes is ridiculous. Funnily enough, the title of the article is "Role models on the pop charts." Apparently, Katy and Rihanna aren't role models because they sing about sex and drinking. Never mind the fact that both women are very successful, self-made business women. The fact that they drink (maybe not Katy since her husband is a recovering alcoholic) and have sex and sing about it is irrelevant.
Let's also not forget that Rihanna was beaten by her boyfriend and instead of hiding in the shadows has not only continued her career, but openly talked about the incident. That seems like the kind of person to admire: strong-willed, independent, and tough (don't forget also, the picture of her beaten face was plastered all over the Internet).
I'm not suggesting a five-year old should be singing the lyrics to "S&M" or "Last Friday Night." However, vulgarity is everywhere: in movies, TV shows, and magazines. People should be allowed to share their urges and private thoughts.
Then there's the question of what is vulgar. If, for instance, Rihanna had thoughts about pounding Chris Brown into a pancake and decided to record a song about it, would that be considered vulgar even though most anyone would agree she has every right to feel that way? Or, instead, if Rihanna met a great guy and had thoughts about sleeping with him, would it be vulgar to share those thoughts?
We know the answer to the latter is yes; at least, we know Laura Ingraham and the author of the aforementioned article think so. We don't really know about the former. Truthfully, I don't think either is vulgar. We feel what we feel and art allows us to express that. What's the difference between art and vulgarity?
Is a picture of two people engaged in a sexual act more vulgar than the description of that act itself? Who decides that? I would assume the description is more vulgar, because with the picture you can see what you want to see and avoid what you don't. With the description, you hear whatever the describer is telling you whether you want to or not. Of course, I don't know if I'm qualified to make that distinction.
Rihanna, Katy and all the other artists topping the charts may be vulgar. It's their right as artists to express themselves however they choose - sex, drugs AND rock n' roll.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)