I've seen a fair amount of hand-wringing and pearl clutching over the Beyonce/Jay-Z GRAMMY's performance and how "anti-feminist" it apparently was and so I felt the need to look into it a bit more closely myself. I tend to view everything through a feminist lens and am usually the first person to declare something misogynistic but I watched the video and I've seen the photos and for me, it really was just a slick, well-rehearsed performance by two professionals who appear to also be a very loved-up couple. It seems a lot of people felt it was an uneven performance because Beyonce was dressed in fairly minimal attire while her husband was fully suited and did considerably less writhing around the stage than his missus.
Yes, this is tiresome and by that token, nothing new. The same people were only recently applauding Ms Knowles for her strongly pro-feminist album release in December even though she wears similarly minimal clothing in the artwork and videos for that album. So it seems to be the presence of a male counterpart with the combination of her outfit that's bothering people in this scenario.
If this was the video for Blurred Lines, I would be agreeing wholeheartedly. That was a whole mess of misogyny; the lyrics, fully clothed men surrounded by women who were either naked or scantily-clad and treated as props was frankly, stomach-churning. However, for me, the crucial difference is that Beyonce is most definitely not a prop here. She's not a backing-singer, a dancer or stage-decoration for Jay-Z. She comes out singing her own song, in control. If anything, Jay-Z is providing back-up for her. It's just a very different power dynamic. How Beyonce chooses to express herself visually is surely up to her and if you think about it, this is how she always dresses on stage and in her videos and always has, since her Destiny's Child days. So is it just the fact that Jay-Z was present and chose to wear a suit that is irksome? Would you rather she had worn more or he had worn less? I'm genuinely asking, not being facetious here at all!
If this was the video for Blurred Lines, I would be agreeing wholeheartedly. That was a whole mess of misogyny; the lyrics, fully clothed men surrounded by women who were either naked or scantily-clad and treated as props was frankly, stomach-churning. However, for me, the crucial difference is that Beyonce is most definitely not a prop here. She's not a backing-singer, a dancer or stage-decoration for Jay-Z. She comes out singing her own song, in control. If anything, Jay-Z is providing back-up for her. It's just a very different power dynamic. How Beyonce chooses to express herself visually is surely up to her and if you think about it, this is how she always dresses on stage and in her videos and always has, since her Destiny's Child days. So is it just the fact that Jay-Z was present and chose to wear a suit that is irksome? Would you rather she had worn more or he had worn less? I'm genuinely asking, not being facetious here at all!
To clarify, I'm not advocating the hyper-sexualisation of female pop stars by any means. I was one of the many people left disturbed by the Miley Cyrus VMA performance last year but that was purely because I felt concern for her; she seemed a bit dazed and most definitely not in control of the situation. That sounds incredibly patronising I know, but it's how I felt. I've seen countless Madonna performances with similar shock tactic outfits/dance moves but they didn't leave me feeling uncomfortable in the way Miley's did. And I certainly didn't feel that way either when I watched Beyonce yesterday.
Look, I'm not the world's number one Beyonce fan so this isn't coming from a place of blind allegiance to her but I generally have a fairly good gut-instinct when it comes to these things and "anti-feminist" really did not spring to mind when I watched the video of their performance.
I guess what I'm really wondering is, can someone only be considered a feminist if they adhere strictly to what you personally associate with the word? Or can the individual alter it to suit their own interpretation? As far as I'm aware, there are many different definitions of feminism floating around and so I feel uneasy about judging anyone's feminist credentials because of that.
I could well be completely off the mark here though, so please let me know in the comments if you disagree with my interpretation and you think there's something a bit askew here.
I guess what I'm really wondering is, can someone only be considered a feminist if they adhere strictly to what you personally associate with the word? Or can the individual alter it to suit their own interpretation? As far as I'm aware, there are many different definitions of feminism floating around and so I feel uneasy about judging anyone's feminist credentials because of that.
I could well be completely off the mark here though, so please let me know in the comments if you disagree with my interpretation and you think there's something a bit askew here.
0 Yorumlar