poptimists | Let's Talk About Sechs

Let's Talk About Sechs

"Isn't sex the point of pop?" asks the Lex. I dunno about the point, maybe a point, but is there really a lot of sexy pop around? (And what would that mean anyway?)

~~I have (I think!) enabled ANONYMOUS COMMENTS on this post if anyone would like to use em.~~ No, I haven't, ignore that bit.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Especially when it inverts the traditional power dynamic (ie women taking the reins, men being the sexual objects)

Although I wouldn't want to argue that we live in just, gender-equal (or even neutral) societies, I have to say that I really don't agree with this statement, mainly because I feel that the overwhelming dynamic in pop is one of strong powerful women, frequently rejecting men who they regard as weak or otherwise unworthy. And James Blunt not to mention most indie, is all about guys being sensitive (it is not?) Emo kind of throws a wrench into things, but anyway.

Now while that may mean pop is subversive compared to real life, within the world of pop, the whole thing gets kind of motonous, doesn't it? I have so little interest in listening to a woman sing about how weak I am. There's no pleasure in that, and certainly no sex.

I think it's a very positive thing that the overwhelming dynamic in mainstream pop is at odds with the traditional and widespread dynamic in mainstream society and would like more strong women dismissing weak men please.

sounds like 'restoring the balance' but can be seen as 'lowering themselves to the same level', is the problem there.

or otherwise, at what point will the scales balance as opposed to just being tipped the opposite way every now and then (inc. in the context of a man-bashing pop song)?

I don't think man-bashing pop stars are trying to "restore the balance" in some sort of grand cosmic social debt thing; if you read interviews with Beyoncé et al they tend to place more importance on the fact that ordinary women (in society, where the trad dynamic still applies) can identify with the emotions and situations in their songs. I think writing and performing a song which helps one individual woman find the strength to say no/chuck out a no-good loser is far more important and achievable in this context than trying to end global inequality.

sure but there's different levels on which you can do this, a difference between writing a song to boost a woman's confidence/inspire them to change their situation and a song which can do the same thing but does so by listing all the reasons the man was weak/rubbish/whatever or focussing on the other's flaws rather than the victim's pros (just like party politics ha). i guess both have their place - either way it won't mean much to me personally. i'm sure you can guess from all this what the most appealing aspect of e.g. 'Caught Out There' was for me.

But when r&b divas sing songs about their attributes they get dismissed as arrogant/self-empowering!

So do the men.

Well, one of the problems with "subversion" is that every act of "subversiveness" tends to exclude a new set of people who then need to find their own means of "subversion". So we have

Male-dominant female-object mainstream media 'subverted' by
Female-dominant male-object pop which in turn excludes
People who want to reject objectivisation anyway - now maybe these people CAN'T do this, or maybe their kind of pop would be rubbish, I don't know.

I think the phrase "power dynamic" is more useful than the phrase "subversion" - since all the subversion is doing is offering an alternative power dynamic.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Let's Talk About Sechs

Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"

Re: Lex writes on "the traditional"