Dutch music monthly Oor has a long article (eight pages) about "Prince in the #metoo era" in their latest issue (July 2018, no. 7). Written by Tom Engelshoven, one of the authors of Prince Roger Nelson: De Biografie, it seems to examine Prince's contradictory attitudes towards women based on his song lyrics, interviews, testimonies of people who worked with him -- Candy Dulfer, Susan Rogers (misspelled as "Rodgers"),...

.

.

From https://oor.nl/magazine/:

.

Hij is al twee jaar niet meer onder ons, maar Prince blijft hot. Onomstreden als groot componist, al zijn er ook genoeg vraagtekens. Was His Royal Badness in het dagelijks leven net zo’n hyperseksuele womanizer als in zijn songs? En wat is, in het licht van #MeToo, nou de legacy van een van de grootste popsterren van onze tijd? Tom Engelshoven zocht het uit.

.

Does the article talk about Sinéad O'Connor?

BartVanHemelen said:

CandyCool said:

Well, the title is pretty disingenuous. No woman (or man, for that matter) has ever accused Prince of the things that the #MeToo movement rightfully protests against. Women like Candy Dulfer and Susan Rogers, and others, have always said that while he could be a tough boss, he was also into uplifting and empowering women, not abusing them. So what if Prince had contradictory attitudes about women in his music, etc. That’s not abuse. So what if he was a hypersexual womanizer. Again, that doesn’t equal abuse. Suggesting that his legacy is somehow tainted by #MeToo type behaviour is a cheap shot. But I suppose that sells better than 8 pages of “here’s a guy who empowered women”.

Agreed. Prince was a contradiction, but so are all great artists. To reframe his art against the context and politics of the #metoo movement (or any contemporary movement) is a bit challenging.