J-Lo's "empowering" objectification of men in new song

GardenMadness

speedboatchase wrote: »

I literally left the links 4 posts before yours.

The links to say that this video was fun, not the links to show that these exact writers were against the whole Blurred Lines fiasco. Or are you arguing that if one woman says something, all women said it?

tsiehta

Ah, reading a bit more about it, I understand a bit better where the feminist angle comes from.

Cultural context and intent are important here.

On the cultural context part, you have to consider the frequency of women being used as eye candy in the media compared to men. I think you'd have to be quite dishonest to deny that women are overwhelmingly used for this purpose more.

Then the intent part concerns whether this video was made as a satirical reaction to the way women are very frequently portrayed in music videos compared to men, or if it's just a random video where men happen to be objectified.

If you construe the intent as being the former, I can see where the feminism and empowerment angle comes in. And if a music video featuring an overt objectification of men, which is exceptional in our culture, was specifically created to make a point about the frequency of its occurrence with the genders swapped, then it hardly makes sense to hold it up as an example of the prevalence of male objectification in our society, and the lack of outcry about it. You can, of course, argue that the men in video should not have been objectified just to make this point.

On the other hand, if the there was no such intent, and it's just a random video featuring male objectification, it's certainly fine to condemn it as wrong, but the lack of outcry about it doesn't invalidate the offense others felt to the likes of Blurred Lines. And one video, along with a handful of other examples from the past doesn't change the current situation, in which women are still objectified far more frequently than men. This also explains why there is little fuss made about male objectification - it exists, but we're not bombarded by it anywhere close to incidences of female objectification.

speedboatchase

GardenMadness wrote: »

The links to say that this video was fun, not the links to show that these exact writers were against the whole Blurred Lines fiasco. Or are you arguing that if one woman says something, all women said it?

When did I say those exact same writers had differing opinions for Blurred Lines, or that I blamed all women (a fairly insulting and infantile conclusion) for the reaction to the Blurred Lines video? I never did.

I was asked for links for the video being described as empowering and I provided them.

Standman

I don't really have much time for people moaning about "objectification" in music videos. As long as everyone involved are consenting adults, then have at it.

speedboatchase

Standman wrote: »

I don't really have much time for people moaning about "objectification" in music videos. As long as everyone involved are consenting adults, then have at it.

I feel the same. But I created this thread because I felt the mass media reaction for this video was much less damning than the video for Blurred Lines.

tunguska

speedboatchase wrote: »

I feel the same. But I created this thread because I felt the mass media reaction for this video was much less damning than the video for Blurred Lines.

Yeah I just think people forget that the models/dancers in these videos are there of their own free will. You're right though, there does tend to be more of a kick up when its women as opposed to men being (supposedly) objectified. I think its because as men we're easy going by nature and dont really care.
Male or female though, the people who appear in these videos are doing so because they want to, end of story.

The Domonator

Who's J-lo?

Galvasean

tunguska wrote: »

You're right though, there does tend to be more of a kick up when its women as opposed to men being (supposedly) objectified.

I'm always reminded of that Hunky Dorys commercial that everyone busted a gasket over because it featured an amply chested woman with her cleavage out. No one seemed to bat an eyelid at the 'nice tackle' ad by the same company that 'objectified' some rugby player's man parts.
The whole thing was a big hulabaloo about nothing if you ask me. Ditto for the Blurred Lines thing. If a man or a woman can make a living for themself by showing off their body then more power to them.

Daveysil15

I don't get all the fuss over the Blurred Lines video. What exactly is wrong with it? It's no worse than any of those Rn'B videos. As for the new J-Lo video, the only conclusion I've come to after watching that is how terrible her music is. I don't think she has ever released a good single.

Galvasean

You take that back - Waiting For Tonight was awesome! :mad:

Daveysil15

Galvasean wrote: »

You take that back - Waiting For Tonight was awesome! :mad:

Some of her earlier stuff wasn't too bad actually. Her new sh1t is... well sh1t.

Lukehandypants

The Domonator wrote: »

Who's J-lo?

Excatly, this an attempt at a flagging career to grab the limelight she formally had.
I could imagine the pitch for that's video...

fits

What do ye think of this one?

Daveysil15

fits wrote: »

What do ye think of this one?

Ahh jasus that's worse than the J-Lo song. Honestly, the only thing that comes to mind when watching some of these videos is how terrible the music is.

fits

I think its a decent pop song actually. And the video is good