Author: Former Student

What Do You Mean, Justin?

Posted on by Former Student

In recent years, Justin Bieber has become one of the world’s top celebrities with the expansion of his singing and modeling career. Beliebers (as Justin’s dedicated fans call themselves) keep up with all the latest news and gossip regarding Justin’s life, relationships, and, of course, the most current songs. When most fans think of this pop music icon, the words “handsome,” “sexy,” “stylish,” “friendly,” and “cool” may come to mind. However, “sexual predator” should possibly be added to this list of favorable words. When Justin Bieber released his hit single “What Do You Mean?” in 2015, it became the fastest single record to reach number one on iTunes (Lyons). Though a catchy beat, “What Do You Mean?” promotes rape culture through masculine dominance in the heterosexual relationship portrayed through the lyrics as well as contradictory actions and gestures throughout the music video.

Rape culture is a term coined in the 1970s by feminists in the United States as a tool to “show the ways in which society blamed victims of sexual assault and normalized male sexual violence” (What is Rape Culture?). In her book Transforming a Rape Culture, Emilie Buchwald defines rape culture as “a complex set of beliefs that encourages male sexual aggression and supports violence against women” (What is Rape Culture?). Though many view sexual assault and rape as predominately a masculine act that disproportionally affects women, as education has progressed, the belief has evolved to include the fact that it can happen to anyone regardless of gender identity. Along with the progression of sex education, the law has changed to encompass different aspects of sexual assault. Today, the law provides strict guidelines for the definition of rape, but rape culture has normalized this sexual violence in society through passively condoning rape. In terms of the law, lack of explicit verbal consent to any sexual act means that the sexual act is rape, which is a federal crime. However, pop culture often normalizes and victim-blames sexual violence through sexual objectification of women in music, movies, advertising, and TV shows.

Specifically exploring the lyrics of Justin Bieber’s “What Do You Mean?” reveals of the promotion of rape culture. From the beginning of the song and throughout the chorus, Justin Bieber asks “What do you mean?” then proceeds with, “When you nod your head yes, but you wanna say no. What do you mean?” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber). Here lies the main problem in the lyrics: lack of consent. Though Justin uses this lack of consent to create sexual tension, it emphasizes women’s sexual indecision, which is a key component of rape culture. Rape culture simplifies this process of consent, letting one partner dominate the decision. Portrayed as the “good guy” on the surface level, Justin Bieber works to figure out what the woman actually wants. Just as Justin exemplifies, rape culture depicts the everyday, average guy as the “good guy” so that there is no way he could possibly be thought of as a rapist (Bridges, Pascoe).  This ideology can then lead to the perpetuation of “playing hard to get” in order to earn the affection of a potential mate.  The “game” of “playing hard to get” steers further into dangerous waters as it not only establishes the belief that “no” can equal “yes” in the journey of pursuit, but commends those who ignore consent. As non-verbal language becomes prioritized over verbal language, misinterpretation of meaning becomes more common, further promoting rape culture (Redkar).  This tactic and use of non-verbal cues contrary to verbal language becomes a key component of Justin Bieber’s music video subsequently discussed.

Later in the song, Bieber states, “you’re so indecisive of what I’m saying,” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber). Not only does this statement not make sense grammatically, but it also adds a harsh stigma to female indecision. Often, this sense of indecision and hesitancy occurs in an uncomfortable or precarious situation as a personal warning sign to proceed with caution. In this situation, the woman experiences indecision due to Bieber’s dominant sexual actions as well as consistent pressure for her to make up her mind. Just like the woman in the music video, women are allowed to be indecisive about sexual activities and this indecisiveness should be a red light for their partner to let them have their space to figure out what they personally want to do. This does become dangerous, as Bieber exemplifies, when the partner takes it upon him or herself to determine what the other is thinking. Bieber’s lyrics make it seem that unwanted sexual actions or misinterpretations are the fault of the women because she was not clear what she wanted, adding “Better make up your mind” and “You’re so confusing” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber). He pressures her into making a decision as “we’re running out of time” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber).  Though she clearly is sending him mixed signals about her true feelings, he forces her into a decision, once again telling her “Better make up your mind” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber).  Due to her indecision, Bieber makes the decision for her and assumes that since they’ve had sex before, she wants to have it again: “Wanna argue all day, make love all night” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber). However, sex is not black and white, like Bieber depicts; people are allowed to engage in some sexual activities without going all the way to sex every time and to discontinue activities at any point. Further, in this lyric, Bieber sexualizes female aggression by linking arguing to sex, romanticizing a toxic relationship dynamic. This suggests that rather than being seen as mutually exclusive, conflict and intimacy are both key components of an ideal relationship. By normalizing violence and conflict within this idealized relationship dynamic, Bieber’s music video endorses another aspect of rape culture.

Justin Bieber’s music video for “What Do You Mean?” continues to promote rape culture by hiding the lyrical meaning through contradictory actions and gestures. The video’s broader narrative framework expands the meaning of rape culture, starting from the beginning of the music video. The scene of the video opens with a dark, stormy night as Justin Bieber and John Leguizamo stand outside a motel. Justin hands John money, making him promise “the girl won’t get hurt,” but John, handing Justin a lighter, replies, “you play with fire, you might just get burnt.” Later in the video, it is discovered that Justin is paying for the fake kidnapping of the woman he meets in the motel room and him. The screen then flashes to the motel room with a woman waiting as a clock begins ticking, immediately creating the tension and pressure surrounding the impending situation. The woman then answers the door to Justin, instantly sexually drawn to him. As the video progresses with on and off sexual intimacy between Justin and the woman, the tension builds. Soon after, they are both taken by men in masks, tied up, and driven to a warehouse in the trunk of a car. At the warehouse, Justin is able to use the lighter, given to him by his kidnapper, to burn the ropes and escape. Here, they run to a door on one of the top floors, which leads to outside. As the pressure builds, the music suddenly stops; Justin holds out his hand and turns to her saying, “Trust me. Do you trust me? Take my hand.” Breathing heavily, she takes his hand and they jump out of the building, landing on huge air-pillows in the middle of a party. As the “kidnappers” take off their masks smiling, the woman discovers it was all a trick, grabbing Justin and kissing him as they begin to dance (JustinBieberVEVO).

From the beginning of the video, the woman is immediately sexually drawn to Justin Bieber, contrary to what the lyrics imply. The video content works to conceal the content of the lyrical connotations, a common theme in encouraging rape culture (Bridges, Pascoe). The woman does not appear to be bothered by Bieber’s demands and questions, going along with all he wants her to do and again acting contradictory to the lyrics. In the lyrics of the song, the woman seems unsure of her feelings as she “nods” her “head yes,” but she wants to “say no” (Levy, Boyd, Bieber). However, the video makes it clear that she is sexual attracted to Justin and wants to be intimate with him as she immediately grabs him as he enters the motel room. Her actions make it appear as a normality for women to abide by the demands of a man, not questioning their own feelings or desires; masculinity is, therefore, equated with power in a heteronormative relationship.

The story line of the music video is a key element used to take away from the lyrical connotations and indecision. The broadened narrative throughout the music video does not at all tell the story of the lyrics from the song. The lyrics create this tension surrounding the pressure on the woman to be intimate with Justin and his frustration with her indecisiveness. However, Justin Bieber’s scheme throughout the video is just a test of her trust: a ploy to get her to make a decision about their relationship and to earn her trust so that she will have sex with him. This terrorizing view of romance, contrary to the rape culture influences, is not the way to go about love. Rape culture portrays violence as pleasurable and desirable in a relationship. This creates the view as the masculine figure in a relationship as the protector. Once again, equating masculinity with power.

Though a common cultural icon, Justin Bieber is a key contributor to the promotion of rape culture in society today. The lyrics to as well as the music video for his recent hit “What Do You Mean?” encourages masculine dominance and violence against women in heterosexual relationships through lyrical connotations, actors’ actions, and setting. Rape culture not only creates the problem of sexualized power within relationships, but supports heteronormative relationships. In a rapidly changing culture regarding gender and sexuality, this constructs yet another barrier to breaking down norms. Justin Bieber is just one example of the countless celebrities encouraging rape culture, further enforcing the monolithic ideology behind heteronormativity.

 

Works Cited

Bridges, Tristan, and C.J. Pascoe. “Pop Music, Rape Culture, and the Sexualization of Blurred Lines.” Feminist Reflections. The Society Pages, 12 Nov. 2015. Web. 06 Sept. 2016.

JustinBieberVEVO. “Justin Bieber – What Do You Mean?” YouTube. YouTube, 30 Aug. 2015. Web. 06 Sept. 2016.

Levy, Mason, Jason Boyd, and Justin Bieber. “What Do You Mean? – Justin Bieber.” Google  Play Music. Warner/Chappell, Inc, Universal Music Publishing Group, n.d. Web. 06 Sept. 2016.

Lyons, Sofia. “How ‘What Do You Mean’ Promotes Rape Culture.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 Sept. 2015. Web. 05 Sept. 2016.

Redkar, Nikita. “4 Reasons Why Telling Women to ‘Play Hard to Get’ Perpetuates Rape Culture.” Everyday Feminism Magazine. Everyday Feminism, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 11 Sept. 2016.

 

Sorry Infiniti, We Don’t Live in a Post-Gay Society

Posted on by Former Student

Ellen Degeneres once asked, “Do we have to know who’s gay and who’s straight? Can’t we just love everybody and judge them by the car they drive?” Apparently not. Earlier this year, Infiniti released an ad drawing a parallel between the process of coming out, often one that denotes pain and societal rejection, and choosing a different luxury car model. The ad, titled “Legacy” opens with a young man pulling up to the driveway of his elaborate childhood home, taking a deep breath as he anxiously prepares to meet his father. We see the man with his arms crossed, reminiscing over pictures of himself and his father, while dramatic music filled with regret looms in the background.  When his father, a serious, conservative looking older man joins him in the living room, the young man takes one final glance at a picture of the two of them at his graduation and confesses, “look, this isn’t easy for me either.” Stammering, he continues, “I’m sorry if you don’t like it, but it just feels right,” leaving readers anticipating for the young man to come out. Immediately the scene intercuts to the young man racing down the highway in an Infiniti, and we learn that “it” actually refers to his decision to pursue one luxury car instead of another. Panning back to the living room the disapproving father remarks, “This isn’t how we raised you.” The young man pleads with his father, asking him “Didn’t you ever want to try it,” posing a dangerous double entendre. Cutting him off, the father declares “enough.” In their final interactions, the young man pleads, “you must have known I was a little different.” Having the last word, the father remarks, “this isn’t how we raised you.” The final scene of the ad shows the young man racing off in his sports car, with a message from Infiniti encouraging viewers to “start your own legacy.”

However, this pseudo-coming out narrative is problematic for many reasons. For instance, the experience of coming out isn’t marked by the privilege of driving a sports car. Despite the disapproval of his father, the young man can drive off in his sports car and “start his own legacy.” Unfortunately, for many LGBTQ+ individuals, the legacy of coming out results in homeless youth, countless suicides, and overall societal rejection. The reality is that individuals who do not confine to heterosexuality suffer from socio-economic injustices, and constructing an ad that commercializes homosexual identities is deeply, morally troubling. Encouraging viewers to “create their own legacy” reveals an assumption underlying the ad’s creation that being gay is analogous to a break in tradition. The luxurious Infiniti provides an escape for the young man, signifying his privilege in remaining unaffected socio-economic and cultural degradation. This proves to be extremely disrespectful to countless LGBTQ+ individuals who encounter reduced job prospects or remain impoverished after being shunned by their family; for these individuals, purchasing a luxury car is not an option. Gay and transgender workers are increasingly subjected to high rates of discrimination regarding hiring, firing, and wages, according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law.  The Williams Institute found that gay and bisexual men are positioned to earn ten to thirty-two percent less than their heterosexual male counterparts. As a result of increased workforce discrimination, a gay and transgender pay gap transcends the work place, further rendering the privileged portrayal of homosexuality far-fetched from reality. Likening the experience of coming out to the decision to forgo a luxury car not only posits sexuality as a choice, but also associates the intolerance facing individuals who fall outside heterosexuality with privilege.

Additionally, the ad frames the coming out experience within wealthy White American home also, reveals an underlying assumption of homonormativity undergirding the makers of the ad. Ignoring the intersectionality surrounding homosexuality dismisses the racial dimensions of power and privilege in coming out narratives. To the same extent that heteronormativity has subjugated homosexuality, homonormativity has associated changes in societal perceptions of “coming out,” ignoring the lack of progress experienced by minorities. While the coming out narrative is becoming more frequently associated with societal normalization, the experience of individuals not privileged by race is ignored. In this way, the coming out narrative has evolved to exclude the discriminations faced by those who cross intersectional boundaries. Unfolding the pseudo-coming out narrative in a traditional WASP household, with a brick mansion and manicured lawn, the ad perpetuates notions of homonormativity and diminishes the experiences of minorities whom, belonging to two marginalized groups, face intense discrimination and prejudice. As a result, the stories of minorities, who struggle with racial and homophobic discrimination are made invisible, which perpetuates the failure of society to recognize, validate, and empathize with the experiences of the “not so traditional gay.”

The makers of the add create a double entendre underlying question “Didn’t you ever want to try it” portrays the desire to transcend heteronormative boundaries as tempting and rebellious, which simply is unreflective of the reality of crossing these norms. While the young man is portrayed as rebellious and exciting in his decision to “try it,” identifying as homosexual in a disapproving, unaccepting family is far from attractive. Findings from the Williams institute indicate that 40% of homeless youth served by housing programs and youth shelters identify as LGBTQ+. Consequently, many young LGBTQ+ individuals refrain from expressing, out of fear of isolation and rejection from their families.

If Infiniti was trying to brand itself as an ally of the LGBTQ+ community, it failed. If executives constructed this ad off the notion that society has normalized homosexuality, then they are very wrong.  While the ad makers may see modern America as post gay, the reality facing gender queer and homosexual individuals is one of discrimination, violence, social rejection, and often suicide. Creating a framework that claims to see all forms of sexual orientation equal ignores the social reality that heterosexuality is so embedded in society that queer individuals continue to face overt discrimination. The media is a powerful tool that should be used to dismantle social constructions that discriminate against marginalized groups, and Infiniti could have used their corporate power to construct an ad underscoring the pain of coming out or enlightening viewers on the intersectionality that transcends homosexuality. Instead, the makers of the ad decided to appropriate the coming out narrative in order to increase car sales, which is deeply upsetting in a society where LGBTQ+ individuals are targeted, marginalized, and subjugated daily. Unfortunately, as long as the reality among queer individuals is one of lived discrimination, we can’t pretend to not see or be affected by sexuality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzzMJuFskUQ

Why Women Should Stop Trying to Dress Like Everyone Else at Work

Posted on by Former Student

http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/women-in-business-double-standard/

It is no secret that the tech industry is primarily male dominated.  This article discusses the varying strategies a woman should take part in to appear professional in accordance to their male counterparts. There are several ideas about what a woman should wear in order to be taken seriously, such as clear nail polish instead of colorful polish.  However, those who are successful are confident and comfortable with themselves and don’t follow a formula.  Additionally, there are several double standards in the workforce, such as a woman inviting a male colleague out for drinks.  Although not how it should be, it is recommended to err on the side of caution in these situations.  Moreover, the article encourages woman in the workforce to find their allies and remember they have a voice too.

 

This article reminded me of a select few parts of  Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz’s “The Reply to Sor Philotea” because the article has to do with the difference’s between men and woman in education and the workforce.  Cruz states, “she should dress me in boy’s clothing” and “the natural adornment of one’s hair is held in such high esteem, I cut mine off” (15).  Sor Juana is trying to figure out how to blend into this male-dominated society.  Even though times are clearly very different, some of the same questions still apply.