Subject: [Fwd: gender: britney, etc.]
From: jenn!! (jenn@krox.com)
Date: Wed Oct 06 1999 - 19:07:12 CDT
I sent this to Freddie, but I really meant to send it to everyone....
It is for everyone, just in response to Fab-5-freddies last email.
attached mail follows:
I recently was on a panel of some music folks & parents - we sat down
with some 'eastside' youth (Ages 8-12) and played samples of tunes &
asked them what they (the youth) thought about the lyrics --
the R&B beat started & the music bumped & the lyrics went:
"Hangin with the homes waiting for my bitch, she's gonna.........then
I'm gonna do it up her ass" -- Everyone of those youth knew all the
lyrics...The young boys said that it was just a song & it didn't mean
anything, the young girls said nothing in repsonse
What do you think?
A R wrote:
> i don't want to keep beating a dead horse, but what we
> were discussing today really hit a chord in me. i
> guess it's cuz i'm a music-lover and like to think
> about the social(gender, race, etc.) implications of
> music.
>
> i just wanted to share my thoughts on some things that
> were said in class that i thought about later.
>
> *limpbizkit (don't know how to spell it, sorry)--
>
> someone brought them/him up. i think he still works
> within the same system as britney. i mean, he is a
> white, hetero male and we know that our society
> "allows" men to be more sexual and agressive than
> women. the fact that his song is called "nookie" just
> supports that fact. it's the whole thing about a
> woman who has a lot of sex being a whore and a man who
> does it being a pimpdaddy or something. it also goes
> into the whole good girl, bad boy thing. i mean think
> grease. you have rebel guy whose attracted to pure,
> innocent girl. obviously both are sexualized because
> there is the attraction between the two. it's like
> "boys will be boys" and "gotta be a good girl."
>
> and then you have have britney's songs "baby, one more
> time," "sometimes," and "crazy for you" which are all
> male-centered songs. the man is given more power than
> she has, especially in "baby, one more time." which is
> basically her begging for a second chance from her
> guy. in "sometimes" she sings "sometimes i'm scared
> of you" and "sometimes i run from you." in whatever
> context you take that, it's still giving the male
> object more power than she has. whereas in "nookie"
> the power is the male performer's. in our society men
> can be blatantly sexual whereas women have to be more
> covert (there's that word again) about it or else
> they're looked down upon or criticized. let me give
> an example: britney bearing cleavage and wearing tight
> clothes is obviously sexual, but her lyrics are then
> school-girlish. whereas the "nookie" song is
> in-your-face sexuality. sorry i dragged this out, but
> basically i feel they both work within the legitimate,
> traditional scope of sexuality (which also has room
> for pretty boys i.e. backstreet, et. al)
>
> *britney spears
>
> there was a rolling stone spread done on her some
> months back and they were totally exploiting the whole
> school girl/good girl thing about her image. in one
> pic she was like on a tricyle with a tiny skirt on
> looking very lolita-ish. i was actually sickened by
> the spread. thought it was in bad taste. it just
> evoked a whole child porn/pedaphilia thing to me. but
> why would they present that image of her (twisted as
> it may be) if it wasn't perceived a part of her
> (image) to begin with?
>
> *donny and marie
>
> different era. but i don't doubt they were also
> sexualized. i mean teens had their posters all over
> their rooms. i'm sure, little boys and girls (teens)
> wanted to do them. when donny got married there was a
> negative response from his female fans. his career
> was never the same. (saw it on vh1 behind the music,
> so it must be true) donny and marie. the britney
> spears and backstreet boy of their time? i think so.
>
> *tlc
>
> i agree with jen that they are also very sexualized.
> i feel that they themselves control their own
> sexualization. (as oppossed to the destiny's child
> scenario where other people might be
> controlling/encouraging that sexualization) there
> first single was "ain't to proud to beg" which is a
> pretty hyper-sexual song. they even wore condoms on
> their clothes to promote safe sex. so, i think they
> presented a confident, positive, healthy sexualization
> of themselves that was not male-focused (i.e. in
> regards to power). unlike a foxy brown (or lil' kim)
> who is all about sex in lyric, presentation, dress,
> etc. that caters to a male perspective. they were
> also 21, 22 when the first hit the scene. very much
> at an age where we wouldn't question their adult
> status or their choices.
>
> i apologize for the long-@$$ message. guess i had
> something to say about this particular topic.
>
> for those of you who are not familiar with these
> artists, i also apologize.
>
> to close,i'd just like to say that it's interesting
> that, we all had so much to say about the sexual
> representation of these artists, including myself, and
> that the industry itself is so image-crazy. where
> does talent come into play or does it?
>
> freddie.
>
> =====
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Fri Mar 10 2000 - 13:30:00 CST