She twists an event of someone being an asshole, into a political issue to garner favor.
Person A, disrespects her. She twists this into being an issue that affects all women, and should be brought to light - whilst contradicting herself in expectation and action, once more - With stating that "She was damaged and really quiet", yet goes out of her way to talk about the issue on her Twitter and acting as per the script of being "a victim".
Let's be real - How much do you think, the wording, of someone "doing" her, affects her, if she can stand on stage, in front of millions, waving her ass, having built a career, knowing damn well what she refers to?
It's almost like the matter of fact that someone dared do the action per say, was the offense, not the words - Which, again ; is a dishonest behaviour. Because "Workhours" or not, she does not equate to having special rights just because of her gender nor because of an isolated incident - Nor does it indicate, that she MAKES such a distinction ; because like stated, she talks about it in her free time.
A personal agenda, something she went out of her way to do, instead of just keeping it to work.
I can't see how she would be anything but dishonest, in that prospect.
See through the eyes of a woman.
They can't defend themselves like we can. So they have reason to be extra vigilant. The consequences of not being vigilant can be fatal.
You might not see in terms of extremes, but things can certainly lead there. See everything, not merely the here and now.
This kind of thing is so fucking double standards its actually ridiculously funny.
"So baby, come light me up and maybe I'll let you on it
A little bit dangerous, but baby, that's how I want it
A little less conversation, and a little more touch my body
Cause I’m so into you, into you, into you"
Complains about being a 'piece of meat' to satisfy a sexual need and pleasure then sings about it which openly encourages the act because you're attracted to them.
Oh this bad boy of a song "Boyfriend material".
"Now I've been looking for someone
Trying to find the right boy to wear on my arm
I must admit it
You simply fit it
You were like a cut above the rest, that's why you're winning (hey)".
I'm sure on many occasions that having a woman just to be worn on a man's arm is a complete objectification of them, but apparently it doesn't equal the same? And all I had to do to find these lyrics because I don't listen to them, is to use google.
I don't get why she doesn't want to suffer an ideal yet uses it as a means to make a living and promote it without using self-awareness to consciously go ...hang on? This potentially may cause this to happen.
Last edited by Evangeliste; 2016-12-30 at 12:47 AM.
"Person A, disrespects her. She twists this into being an issue that affects all women, and should be brought to light - whilst contradicting herself in expectation and action, once more - With stating that "She was damaged and really quiet", yet goes out of her way to talk about the issue on her Twitter and acting as per the script of being "a victim"."
When her whole career is built on shaking her ass and singing about such, in front of millions of people.
It's a pretty obvious "lie" (read: Dishonest move), really. "I can shake my ass in front of millions, but one person disrespecting me, by saying someone would sleep with me?!".
Or perhaps you are naive, and believe that she lacks the critical thought of self-awareness in terms of her position and situation? She'd never seek a interview with it, not make it political, unless she understood that it's a hotbutton political issue.
And if you don't know how to offer anything beyond what others see? And if others don't know how to see anything else you offer? It's a bit more complicated then what you make of it, but it's useful to those of us that are only capable of using what you are only capable to make of it.
Last edited by Total Crica; 2016-12-30 at 12:48 AM.
The reasons for the contradictions are obvious, but not politically correct to talk about
It's evolutionary biology folks
"Objectification" is a term used to mask an inconvenient truth
People who actually believe in "objectification" as some kind of systemic dehumanisation are really, really stupid - so stupid that they don't even realise it, and probably never will
Last edited by mmoca8403991fd; 2016-12-30 at 12:52 AM.
They can't...so you're basically calling women inferior to men? Not a lot of He-Men raping women (at least from what I've seen), mostly desperate guys who can't control themselves...
They can learn to defend themselves or carry something for protection...it's not like this guy tried to grab her...it's just words...people are so over-sensitive or use the over-sensitive PC crowd this world is growing into as a excuse to point the finger and bring attention to themselves.
I'm not sure how objectifying her to just a piece of ass is suddenly not boiling her down to... "an object you stick your penis in" as you said because she's not near you. Your statements seemingly contradict there.
Attitudes are not going to change about a stranger just because their proximity to us. It changes when we bond.
But at the end she's a hypocrite when she sings about objectifying men.
To be fair I doubt she's written a single line of any of her songs alone. And I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't even know what the meaning is for some of them. I mean she's sang them thousands of times so she knows the word-by-word lyrics, but that's her job.
Her job is really not that dissimilar to an adult dancer. They fill a niche created by sexual desire (by either men or women). But when they're off the clock, treating them like they're a 24/7 porn-star or dancer or risque singer is... well, kind of stupid. Like, something a stupid person would do because he or she doesn't realize that they're just doing a job.
Objectifying men and women exists and is profitable. If it didn't, sexuality wouldn't be something you can sell (modeling, porn, dancing, etc). And she sells objectification paraphernalia (at a lower level than a porn-star, but still all the same). But when she's walking down the street, she's insulted that someone would tie her, personally, into one of the things they (the consumers of said material) have objectified.
She should take solace in the fact that the person who did that is probably, at some level, fairly mentally vapid. But raging against the very nature of human sexuality when such a large part of it is so publically trade-able isn't very omniscient of her either.