Casual Misogyny: An Open Letter

Dear Y98 DJ:

I can't remember your name.  You're not one of the regular DJ's.  I heard you over the weekend, during some off-hour.  You were introducing a Taylor Swift song and said, "Y'know, for having such a clean-cut, good girl image, she sure has a lot of songs about being a bad girl."  And then you mentioned another song coming up, by someone "Taylor hasn't dated."

Here's the problem with everything you said:

What exactly makes Taylor Swift a "good girl"?  Is it because she's pale and blonde and (to quote her own song) "has that classic, red-lipped" look?  Perhaps it's because she went to a private Christian high school and had a 4.0 GPA?  Maybe it's because many of her first songs were somewhat "innocent" in their subject matter or stories of crushes on boys (which is probably because Swift was only 16 when her first album was released)?

And what about these new songs makes her "bad"?  Because she talks about breaking up?  About having sex?  About being an adult?

Let Leonard lay down some Gender 101 for ya because clearly you don't know.  Here's an exercise usually done in the first day or two of class.

List all the words you can think of for a woman who has a lot of sex:  slut, whore, easy, skank(y), hooker, prostitute, loose, trollop, tramp, harlot, strumpet, hussy, tart, floozy, etc., etc.

List all the words you can think of for a man who has a lot of sex:  stud.

See the difference?  Oh sure, sometimes we can throw "man-whore" in there for the guys, but we even have to add the qualifier "man" to indicate this whore is not female.  Women with healthy sex lives are treated as "bad" women, whores, et cetera, while men are celebrated for the same fact.  You, sir, are perpetuating this age-old stereotype with your comments about Taylor Swift's "goodness" or badness."

But, Leonard, it was just said in passing!

Welcome, my friends, to the world of casual misogyny.  Women of all ages face comments like this on a daily basis.  This DJ's comment is yet another thrown in our collective female face. Please stop reinforcing the "Madonna/whore" false dichotomy.  Please stop implying women can't have healthy sex lives (and also sing about those lives).  Male artists sing about relationships all the time.  When was the last time someone commented on their works in a similar fashion?

Lastly, let Leonard get all "New Criticism 101" on you:  please don't confuse the speaker/narrator (the "I") of a song, poem, or work of art with the actual artist.  Yes, even if it sounds just like that person, down to some of the biographical details, we still allow a small amount of "space" between the two.

But Leonard, it was only said by some DJ whose name you can't even remember!

People in the public eye (or ear, in this case) like DJ's and broadcasters must be especially careful with their words as their words reach a larger audience.  That's part of the job and responsibility of being/having a public persona.  People listen to you, and you never know when someone like me is going to quote you verbatim to point out your casual misogyny.  Every piece of daily sexism adds up; the only way to break it down is to take personal responsibility and STOP SAYING IT, whether you be a DJ or listener, artist or audience.

Try to make sure yours don't suck.

Back in Bitch Mode: But Wait, There's Cake!

This blog has been devoid of new posts for far too long.  So, of course, Leonard is back with something to complain about.  This time we turn our feminist analytic eye to Maroon 5.

The more I hear from you, Maroon 5, the less I like you.  Yes, even you, Adam Levine.  In fact, especially you, Adam Levine.  There is, of course, the outrage over the video for the song "Animals," featuring Levine's real-life wife.  As the article points out, the song already says some pretty disgusting things, like "I'm preyin' on you tonight."  Not okay, Maroon 5!  I'm not going to waste my time dissecting it; the linked HuffPost article already does a good job.  This song has joined the ranks of "Blurred Lines" for me -- meaning I turn the station as soon as it comes on.

Instead, let's look at the "harmless" song "Sugar."  And let us, for the time being, ignore that it is a rip off of Prince's "U Got the Look."  Seriously.  The first time I heard the song, I thought I was hearing a cover of a Prince song, just couldn't put my finger on which one.

Since that first hearing, I inevitably catch the song during its bridge of :

I want that red velvet

I want that sugar sweet

Don't let nobody touch it

Unless that somebody's me

I gotta be a man

There ain't no other way

So, before Leonard starts frothing at the mouth, let's take a look-see.  "Sugar," of course, is a euphemism for specifically kisses, more generally loving actions/affection.  Angela Landsbury even uses it in the 1961 Elvis Presley film Blue Hawaii -- in which she plays Elvis' mother.  Let that sink in for a bit.

So Adam Levine¹ wants our "sugar."  Okay, fine.  But our "red velvet"?  He's not talking about the cake, ladies and gentlemen.  "Velvet" is a euphemism for "vagina"; in fact, "tipping the velvet" means cunnilingus (see also:  Tipping the Velvet by Sarah Waters).  "Red velvet" is even more explicit as labia is generally pinkish colored.

So Adam Levine wants my vagina now.  Alright, fine.  BUT, here's the problem(s):  "Don't let nobody touch it / Unless that somebody's me."  Excuse me?  You do not have agency over my body parts, Adam Levine; only I do.  You do not get to say who gets to touch it.  Saying "don't let nobody touch it" even excludes me from touching myself (and that's certainly not going to happen).  IF I let someone else "touch it," that's my decision, whether it's the "you" (here Adam Levine) or someone else.

But wait, there's more!
"I gotta be a man / There ain't no other way"
So apparently Adam Levine's masculinity depends on his ability to touch and/or control my body?  Don't look at me that way, readers.  He said it!  In fact, he just said that the ONLY way to "be a man" (whatever the fuck that means) is to have my body.

Masculinity is so many other things, and one person's ability to "feel" masculine (or feminine or whatever) is not up to some other person.  Just as I have agency over my body, so do you have control over how you want to feel and/or explore your gender.  Don't bring my red velvet labia into it.

In short, the song is gross, though possibly not as obviously offensive as "Animals."  But to top it all off, the "official video" for the song shows Maroon 5 supposedly crashing wedding receptions and singing this song to newlyweds (straight newlyweds, I should add).  Eww.

¹In all fairness to Mr. Levine, a true rhetorical analysis would not confuse him, the singer, with the speaker of the song (thank you, New Criticism). We typically say "the speaker," just like when dealing with poetry. But it's funnier to say Adam Levine wants Leonard's vagina.