Quote:
Originally Posted by Lateralus
Yes, a lot of pop artists show a lot of skin but if we criticise them for wearing whatever they like, isn't that a step backwards in equal rights? Like when women were criticised for wearing skirts above the knee? Plus, at least Lady Gaga does it in a creative way and does not outwardly try to be attractive, but weird and controversial and freaky instead. Music is only one part of her performances which really include art, fashion, technology and controversy as well. Yes her music is, as Big3 described it, unabashed materialistic pop - but isn't all art real art, or is pop art not? And if someone talented wants to make pop music, what's the problem?
|
I agree with all you say. Expressions of sexuality by women are a way to assert their rights to be sexual beings no less constrained than men. Opposite of Gaga: Burka.
People generally still seem to be uncomfortable with women showing overt sexuality because culture still views women as "good" vs. "bad" based on whether they appear or are sexual. I am glad when people like Lady Gaga do whatever they want with their own bodies and challenge the view that a woman who is sexual in appearance is somehow bad, slutty, promiscuous, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron9567
I understand she does it all as a gimmick towards her career. But to me it should be all about the music. If you have to go to extreme measures to get people to listen to your music. Then you may have to rethink your choice in career. It should be about the music and nothing but the music. just my opinion anyways,
|
I think rarely is a performer's music just about the music, divorced from the person who creates it. I'd much prefer to know about both the person and the music than just the music alone.