This year’s X-factor pushed the boundaries of what is considered acceptable viewing for a family entertainment show. Throughout the weeks the backing dancers have continually inched further and further from tasteful to distasteful. The crescendo however took place this weekend at the semi- finals with performances from Rihanna and Christina Aguilera, who both left nothing to the imagination and brought soft porn to prime time viewing.
I have spoken to both my male and female friends about this and whilst the majority acknowledge that perhaps it was a bit much for a family entertainment show, discussion centred and remained on the visual gratification. For men, Rihanna revealed her goods in a confident suggestive manner that I’m sure created new fantasy scenerio’s in their minds, whilst women not only envied her body but also desired to have that level of confidence and effortless air of sexiness. However as a family show, the level of appropriateness for children seemed to have been overlooked.
“What’s my name?” Rihanna asked as she gyrated across the stage in her mini corset and hot pants, though let’s not embellish it with pretty names, she was in her bra and knickers. Within the catchy chorus she expressed “Hey boy I really wanna see if you can go downtown with a girl like me” “downtown” is a reference to oral sex. This coded word which has not yet been highlighted within the media, perhaps suggests adults were unaware of the sexual undertone or were aware, but presumed children wouldn’t be. Either way, sexual messages were oozing from all directions and it didn’t stop there, Christina Aguilera followed with a “Burlesque” performance from her new film of the same title. This term has done well to remove itself from the tacky label that most strip clubs carry, though this performance was nothing more than a voyeuristic lap dance show and one which was entirely unnecessary.
The media and music industry have become saturated within the notion that sex sells. Due to the influx of images and sexual suggestion the boundaries have faded away and we have become desensitized and somewhat split in regards to what is and isn’t considered acceptable. What used to shock no longer does, it is now the norm and therefore eyelids are rarely batted. The only reason this incident has been highlighted is because it is a family orientated show, had this been a music video or a performance at a music award show the level of appropriateness would not have been called into question, even though children and young adults watch it.
So what exactly are we shocked about? X-factor is a music show and therefore merely represents what we are already subjected to right? I understand that due to the target audience there needs to be boundaries, though it seems we are all in denial in regards to what children and young people are regularly exposed too. If X-factor is called into question then so should Hollyoaks and many other shows. These are starting points to bigger conversations regarding why the media chooses to work in the way it does.
Sexual images, content and suggestion are no longer out of reach on the top shelf of the local newsagents. Press the remote, tune into the radio, look online, it is blatantly there. Look back at artists such as Ciara, Beyonce, Britney and more recently Miley Cyrus for example, they all started out as cute, respectable and innocent and quickly turned into sex objects, tantalising teasers, with outfits associated with porn and lyrical content littered with sexual innuendos. Grooming comes to mind.
The outrageous attire of Lady Gaga has been met with shock but more so now with acceptability and celebration. Why? Because she is seen to be making an artistic statement. Lady Gaga pushed the boundaries of what was deemed unacceptable further than any other artist. Whilst I acknowledge Cher and Madonna came before her, Lady Gaga pushed further by stepping of the stage and into “reality” in the same attire. She lowered the bar or raised the bar, depending on how you choose to look at it and other artists have followed in an attempt to stay on the radar.
Is the “sex sells” marketing tool necessary or needed? Who does it benefit and what impact does it have? If talented singers feel the need to strip of to become noticed and to sell a product then what hope is there for the rest of the general public, young impressionable girls in particular? The message that these constant sexual images promote is that women are objects to be desired. This is what men want and this is what you need to do to please and be validated.
Show some leg, pout your lips, look desirable and your album/single will get to number one. If this is the mindset within the media commercial world, then what is stopping young girls and women using the same techniques to strive for what they want (whatever that may be)?
Emulation is clearly evident in clubs on a Friday and Saturday night. Young women are wearing clothes straight out of the centre pages of their favourite magazines. Whilst being fashionable has always been a trend, what constitutes as sexy and desirable has taken a different direction. The term less is more, has nothing to do with class, holding back, remaining slightly aloof, it now literally refers to wearing less clothes to reveal more of what you have. As a result the dating game has changed, men no longer need to guess or be intrigued. Everything is out on display alongside the sexually suggestive dance moves copied from their idols.
Although priceless, the value of sex and love has depreciated. Value and worth is now within exposure, attention and instant visual and physical gratification. The media is and will always be a powerful influential medium, as a result they need to be forced to look at their methods and governments need to be aware of potential correlations to help find meaning, understanding and solutions to the current drink, drugs, sex, teenage pregnancies and rising STD and HIV issues. Clear boundaries of what is and isn’t acceptable need to be in place to give structure and direction for the young and impressionable. So far 1,000 plus people have complained to Ofcom out of a potential 19 million viewers, does this suggest that people are no longer fazed by the level of sexual content before the watershed?
Parental guidance (PG) refers to content appropriate for family viewing with underlying adult themes. Parental Advisory however is now the label that should be attributed to the majority of visual and audible content.
© Lisa Bent
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar