Timmy84 said:

But I still admire Annie's words. There's gotta be moderation in what you do. You can express yourself sexually without going overboard. Again, it's in the Madonna playbook.

even allot of the adults artists during the 80s who used to project authenticity were forced to flash extreme sexuality to prolong their careers and they were STILL pushed out

Scorp said:

Timmy84 said:

But I still admire Annie's words. There's gotta be moderation in what you do. You can express yourself sexually without going overboard. Again, it's in the Madonna playbook.

even allot of the adults artists during the 80s who used to project authenticity were forced to flash extreme sexuality to prolong their careers and they were STILL pushed out

Especially one man we've dedicate this forum to lol

Timmy84 said:

Scorp said:

even allot of the adults artists during the 80s who used to project authenticity were forced to flash extreme sexuality to prolong their careers and they were STILL pushed out

Especially one man we've dedicate this forum to lol

lolll

Timmy84 said:

But here in lies the issue, where do we allow it to be OK cause an artist has a zillion times the talent to back it up and also, whos to say whos got talent? Lets take a great example of a label pushing sex on a mega talented artist, HEART, from the second they were dropped and then picked up by EMI in 1984 it was do or die, they had people putting them into outfits fashion etc... and here was a band that has about the best female vocalist ever. But even HEART will admit and they rebelled against it as the 80's ended, that they were selling sexual images to push the songs, cause that band was on its deathbed and all of a sudden they have a number one album and their biggest seller ever and numerous top 10 hits. Everyone was getting paid at the label all the way to the road crew, but as Nancy said as Ann's weight became an issue, Nancy was up front and ANN hidden in the back or covered in black, even her own band members asked her sister to speak to her about dropping weight, so they could make more money. So where do we draw the line? because too many these years spawned HEART's most popular work, still played these days, BUT how they did it was it OK? And just because ANN and the band are mega talented is it ok too?

Scorp said:

That.

lastdecember said:

Good points but IMO, Im just disgusted with IT, Miley Cyrus, the state of popular music today because too many of these so called artists dont write their own songs, dont play any instruments, nonetheless produce the music themselves, contribute any song to society that actually conveys true emotion so all we get are these songs with lyrical content based solely on money, vanity, drugs, and "partying" our apathetic lives away, or know how to convey that raw emotion into a performance that alone would leave you speechless or move you to tears. Every music. Its all starting to rely on and become the same thing. But looks go away. So what are we left with? Nothing but has beens, one hit wonders, but most importantly no long lasting legends. Who really thinks any of Justin Beibers songs will be regarded with the same reverence as When Doves Cry in 20 years? That song is almost 30 years old but is still relevant today. Sure, Prince is naked and crawls out of a bathtub in the video, but to me, Prince wasnt just some poser gyrating around for attention. He seemlessly blended sexuality, true spirituality, controversy, and had all the musical talent in the world to back it up, whereas the majority of whats out there today doesnt. Its fake. Its contrived. Its posers trying to fit in. I dont know if having talent makes it ok. I just want it to end.
[Edited 10/8/13 0:30am]

MonsterZeroTwo said:

lastdecember said:

But here in lies the issue, where do we allow it to be OK cause an artist has a zillion times the talent to back it up and also, whos to say whos got talent? Lets take a great example of a label pushing sex on a mega talented artist, HEART, from the second they were dropped and then picked up by EMI in 1984 it was do or die, they had people putting them into outfits fashion etc... and here was a band that has about the best female vocalist ever. But even HEART will admit and they rebelled against it as the 80's ended, that they were selling sexual images to push the songs, cause that band was on its deathbed and all of a sudden they have a number one album and their biggest seller ever and numerous top 10 hits. Everyone was getting paid at the label all the way to the road crew, but as Nancy said as Ann's weight became an issue, Nancy was up front and ANN hidden in the back or covered in black, even her own band members asked her sister to speak to her about dropping weight, so they could make more money. So where do we draw the line? because too many these years spawned HEART's most popular work, still played these days, BUT how they did it was it OK? And just because ANN and the band are mega talented is it ok too?

Good points but IMO, Im just disgusted with IT, Miley Cyrus, the state of popular music today because too many of these so called artists dont write their own songs, dont play any instruments, nonetheless produce the music themselves, contribute any song to society that actually conveys true emotion so all we get are these songs with lyrical content based solely on money, vanity, drugs, and "partying" our apathetic lives away, or know how to convey that raw emotion into a performance that alone would leave you speechless or move you to tears. Every music. Its all starting to rely on and become the same thing. But looks go away. So what are we left with? Nothing but has beens, one hit wonders, but most importantly no long lasting legends. Who really thinks any of Justin Beibers songs will be regarded with the same reverence as When Doves Cry in 20 years? That song is almost 30 years old but is still relevant today. Sure, Prince is naked and crawls out of a bathtub in the video, but to me, Prince wasnt just some poser gyrating around for attention. He seemlessly blended sexuality, true spirituality, controversy, and had all the musical talent in the world to back it up, whereas the majority of whats out there today doesnt. Its fake. Its contrived. Its posers trying to fit in. I dont know if having talent makes it ok. I just want it to end. [Edited 10/8/13 0:30am]

me too

aardvark15 said:

I have to say that I'm disturbed and dismayed by the recent spate of overtly sexualised performances and videos. You know the ones I'm talking about. It seems obvious that certain record companies are peddling highly styled pornography with musical accompaniment. As if the tidal wave of sexualised imagery wasn't already bombarding impressionable young girls enough..I believe in freedom of speech and expression, but the market forces don't give a toss about the notion of boundaries. As long as there's booty to make money out of, it will be bought and sold. It's depressing to see how these performers are so eager to push this new level of low.Their assumption seems to be that misogyny- utilised and displayed through oneself is totally fine, as long as you are the one creating it. As if it's all justified by how many millions of dollars and U tube hits you get from behaving like pimp and prostitute at the same time. It's a glorified and monetized form of self harm.

Gotta love Annie

She's a total hypocrite. Nothing more.

lastdecember said:

Timmy84 said:

Especially one man we've dedicate this forum to lol

But here in lies the issue, where do we allow it to be OK cause an artist has a zillion times the talent to back it up and also, whos to say whos got talent? Lets take a great example of a label pushing sex on a mega talented artist, HEART, from the second they were dropped and then picked up by EMI in 1984 it was do or die, they had people putting them into outfits fashion etc... and here was a band that has about the best female vocalist ever. But even HEART will admit and they rebelled against it as the 80's ended, that they were selling sexual images to push the songs, cause that band was on its deathbed and all of a sudden they have a number one album and their biggest seller ever and numerous top 10 hits. Everyone was getting paid at the label all the way to the road crew, but as Nancy said as Ann's weight became an issue, Nancy was up front and ANN hidden in the back or covered in black, even her own band members asked her sister to speak to her about dropping weight, so they could make more money. So where do we draw the line? because too many these years spawned HEART's most popular work, still played these days, BUT how they did it was it OK? And just because ANN and the band are mega talented is it ok too?

I think the question you should look at is whether the sexual element is something that an artist is being forced to do or being pushed on them against their will and they feel uncomfortable with like your example with Heart or is it something that the artist themselves is choosing to do and is authentic reflection of themselves like for example with people like Prince and Madonna. I don't think any use of sexual imagery should be banned because sex is part of life, we all have sexual feelings and isn't music supposed to be reflecting real life and feelings that people have? Why is a woman presenting herself in a sexual way always seen as misogyny or exploitation? Yes, sometimes it can be, but it can also be a sense of freedom since as women we have always been told sex is bad and good girls can't enjoy it.

Glindathegood said:

lastdecember said:

Timmy84 said: But here in lies the issue, where do we allow it to be OK cause an artist has a zillion times the talent to back it up and also, whos to say whos got talent? Lets take a great example of a label pushing sex on a mega talented artist, HEART, from the second they were dropped and then picked up by EMI in 1984 it was do or die, they had people putting them into outfits fashion etc... and here was a band that has about the best female vocalist ever. But even HEART will admit and they rebelled against it as the 80's ended, that they were selling sexual images to push the songs, cause that band was on its deathbed and all of a sudden they have a number one album and their biggest seller ever and numerous top 10 hits. Everyone was getting paid at the label all the way to the road crew, but as Nancy said as Ann's weight became an issue, Nancy was up front and ANN hidden in the back or covered in black, even her own band members asked her sister to speak to her about dropping weight, so they could make more money. So where do we draw the line? because too many these years spawned HEART's most popular work, still played these days, BUT how they did it was it OK? And just because ANN and the band are mega talented is it ok too?

I think the question you should look at is whether the sexual element is something that an artist is being forced to do or being pushed on them against their will and they feel uncomfortable with like your example with Heart or is it something that the artist themselves is choosing to do and is authentic reflection of themselves like for example with people like Prince and Madonna. I don't think any use of sexual imagery should be banned because sex is part of life, we all have sexual feelings and isn't music supposed to be reflecting real life and feelings that people have? Why is a woman presenting herself in a sexual way always seen as misogyny or exploitation? Yes, sometimes it can be, but it can also be a sense of freedom since as women we have always been told sex is bad and good girls can't enjoy it.

If any artist use sexual expression in a way that was both sexy and classy, I respect it. Elvis Presley, Diana Ross and Donna Summer come to mind when it comes to that. Even modern performers like Shakira and (the late but great) Selena were similar. They were sexy but they were able to do it in a way that was cool. Janet was like that too until a certain time.

Timmy84 said:

Glindathegood said:

I think the question you should look at is whether the sexual element is something that an artist is being forced to do or being pushed on them against their will and they feel uncomfortable with like your example with Heart or is it something that the artist themselves is choosing to do and is authentic reflection of themselves like for example with people like Prince and Madonna. I don't think any use of sexual imagery should be banned because sex is part of life, we all have sexual feelings and isn't music supposed to be reflecting real life and feelings that people have? Why is a woman presenting herself in a sexual way always seen as misogyny or exploitation? Yes, sometimes it can be, but it can also be a sense of freedom since as women we have always been told sex is bad and good girls can't enjoy it.

If any artist use sexual expression in a way that was both sexy and classy, I respect it. Elvis Presley, Diana Ross and Donna Summer come to mind when it comes to that. Even modern performers like Shakira and (the late but great) Selena were similar. They were sexy but they were able to do it in a way that was cool. Janet was like that too until a certain time.

I always thought Aaliyah was like that too, especially during her first two albums. She could be behind black glasses and have on baggy pants and still be this personification of femininity.

Timmy84 said:

Glindathegood said:

I think the question you should look at is whether the sexual element is something that an artist is being forced to do or being pushed on them against their will and they feel uncomfortable with like your example with Heart or is it something that the artist themselves is choosing to do and is authentic reflection of themselves like for example with people like Prince and Madonna. I don't think any use of sexual imagery should be banned because sex is part of life, we all have sexual feelings and isn't music supposed to be reflecting real life and feelings that people have? Why is a woman presenting herself in a sexual way always seen as misogyny or exploitation? Yes, sometimes it can be, but it can also be a sense of freedom since as women we have always been told sex is bad and good girls can't enjoy it.

If any artist use sexual expression in a way that was both sexy and classy, I respect it. Elvis Presley, Diana Ross and Donna Summer come to mind when it comes to that. Even modern performers like Shakira and (the late but great) Selena were similar. They were sexy but they were able to do it in a way that was cool. Janet was like that too until a certain time.

How do you define what's classy and what's not? Isn't that an individual thing?

musicjunky318 said:

Id rather see/listen to women like that again instead of this crap we have today. I feel like women like Aaliyah and TLC were taken more seriously... Maybe I have become my own parent, which I saw someone say in a different thread, but I dont know, is that really such a bad thing?

Glindathegood said:

It is, to a certain extent. Im sorry though, I just dont find dancing teenagers, wannabe strippers, and people who are "weird" only for the sake of being "weird" classy or art. IMO, theyre sluts. Sometimes a piece of shit shouldnt be in a gallery. Sometimes its just a piece of shit

MonsterZeroTwo said:

Glindathegood said:

How do you define what's classy and what's not? Isn't that an individual thing?

It is, to a certain extent. Im sorry though, I just dont find dancing teenagers, wannabe strippers, and people who are "weird" only for the sake of being "weird" classy or art. IMO, theyre sluts. Sometimes a piece of shit shouldnt be in a gallery. Sometimes its just a piece of shit

I've seen some articles that say Miley is a marketing genius. They say she is in complete control of her image. SNL said she was completely professional, flexible, polite to the cast and crew, and made no diva like demands. Doesn't sound like she is in an out of control spiral. Its funny how we think a woman expressing her sexuality in any form tacky or classy is suffering from mental illness.

Let's face it. Its not about music anymore. Its about creating a brand name or a lifestyle and music simply acts as a soundtrack. David Bowie, Prince, Madonna, and many others got the ball rolling decades ago. Now we look to blame the new generation for this instead taking responsibility for the role we played in previous generations. The whole point is too offend or confuse the adults and reflect the attitudes and fantasies of the youth. Miley managed to do that with one performance. Relax, it aint nothing but rock and roll.

[Edited 10/8/13 18:29pm]

lrn36 said:

I've seen some articles that say Miley is a marketing genius. They say she is in complete control of her image. SNL said she was completely professional, flexible, polite to the cast and crew, and made no diva like demands. Doesn't sound like she is in an out of control spiral. Its funny how we think a woman expressing her sexuality in any form tacky or classy is suffering from mental illness.

Let's face it. Its not about music anymore. Its about creating a brand name or a lifestyle and music simply acts as a soundtrack. David Bowie, Prince, Madonna, and many others got the ball rolling decades ago. Now we look to blame the new generation for this instead taking responsibility for the role we played in previous generations. The whole point is too offend or confuse the adults and reflect the attitudes and fantasies of the youth. Miley managed to do that with one performance. Relax, it aint nothing but rock and roll.

[Edited 10/8/13 18:29pm]

chickens coming home to roost......

it's all over.....the music died a very long time ago.....

culture has been obliterated, don't need authenticity anymore because it's now accessible via recorded formats

and these contemporary ensemble of "artists" know this

[Edited 10/8/13 19:33pm]

lrn36 said:

David Bowie, Prince, and Madonna (not so muchat first but eventually) had people thinking about what is acceptable and what is taboo. Miley is just furthering the stigma of sexuality by doing what she's doing. The artist you mentioned were like: "I'm sexual, so what? It's a part of life". Miley however is like: "hey look at me showing off my ass. Isn't it dirty and repulsive to do this. Would you ever think I was on Disney?"

lrn36 said:

I've seen some articles that say Miley is a marketing genius. They say she is in complete control of her image. SNL said she was completely professional, flexible, polite to the cast and crew, and made no diva like demands. Doesn't sound like she is in an out of control spiral. Its funny how we think a woman expressing her sexuality in any form tacky or classy is suffering from mental illness.

Let's face it. Its not about music anymore. Its about creating a brand name or a lifestyle and music simply acts as a soundtrack. David Bowie, Prince, Madonna, and many others got the ball rolling decades ago. Now we look to blame the new generation for this instead taking responsibility for the role we played in previous generations. The whole point is too offend or confuse the adults and reflect the attitudes and fantasies of the youth. Miley managed to do that with one performance. Relax, it aint nothing but rock and roll.

[Edited 10/8/13 18:29pm]

^^^Agreed. Except that her performance (VMA's) wasn't authentic and kind of crappy, that's my only real complaint. Sexual or not that performance was below average.

Could it be that those artists fooled you into thinking they were making a great statement about sexuality? Just like Miley is fooling people into thinking she is the good girl next door who is spiraling out of control.

You're telling me that the song Sister wasn't a blatant attempt by Prince to shock people. Didn't Prince once advised Wendy and Lisa to do something shocking or crazy in their first music video to gain attention? Remember Tipper Gore's campaign against vulgar music with Prince's music especially Darling Nikki targeted as one of the main culprits. Prince was considered one of the nastiest artists back in the day. And older people hated his music as well referring to it as simple garbage. All it did was help sell more albums which is exactly what Miley is doing.

kewlschool said:

lrn36 said:

I've seen some articles that say Miley is a marketing genius. They say she is in complete control of her image. SNL said she was completely professional, flexible, polite to the cast and crew, and made no diva like demands. Doesn't sound like she is in an out of control spiral. Its funny how we think a woman expressing her sexuality in any form tacky or classy is suffering from mental illness.

Let's face it. Its not about music anymore. Its about creating a brand name or a lifestyle and music simply acts as a soundtrack. David Bowie, Prince, Madonna, and many others got the ball rolling decades ago. Now we look to blame the new generation for this instead taking responsibility for the role we played in previous generations. The whole point is too offend or confuse the adults and reflect the attitudes and fantasies of the youth. Miley managed to do that with one performance. Relax, it aint nothing but rock and roll.

[Edited 10/8/13 18:29pm]

^^^Agreed. Except that her performance (VMA's) wasn't authentic and kind of crappy, that's my only real complaint. Sexual or not that performance was below average.

I agree. I'm not talking about her artistry or lack of. I'm referring to people's reaction and criticism of her overt, but sloppy disply of sexuality.

lrn36 said:

kewlschool said:

^^^Agreed. Except that her performance (VMA's) wasn't authentic and kind of crappy, that's my only real complaint. Sexual or not that performance was below average.

I agree. I'm not talking about her artistry or lack of. I'm referring to people's reaction and criticism of her overt, but sloppy disply of sexuality.

Okay-we are on the same page.

lrn36 said:

Could it be that those artists fooled you into thinking they were making a great statement about sexuality? Just like Miley is fooling people into thinking she is the good girl next door who is spiraling out of control.

You're telling me that the song Sister wasn't a blatant attempt by Prince to shock people. Didn't Prince once advised Wendy and Lisa to do something shocking or crazy in their first music video to gain attention? Remember Tipper Gore's campaign against vulgar music with Prince's music especially Darling Nikki targeted as one of the main culprits. Prince was considered one of the nastiest artists back in the day. And older people hated his music as well referring to it as simple garbage. All it did was help sell more albums which is exactly what Miley is doing.

Yep. At the end of the day, that's basically all it is. In a sense, she's kinda toned it down. Kinda lol

lrn36 said:

Youre right. I think its a shame though. Wholeheartedly. Someone pour me a shot 'cause we're all fucked. Lol

"Some of them want to use you

Some of them want to get used by you

Some of them want to abuse you

Some of them want to to be abused..."

purplethunder3121 said:

Damn, that really is a great song. Something Ive definitely related to before. Too bad most people in my generation think Marilyn Manson wrote it. To be honest, when I read your post, I too for a second was like "Why are they quoting Manson?" LOL.
[Edited 10/9/13 21:29pm]

lrn36 said:

Ive been resurfacing a lot of music lately. Found some Annie Lennox stuff, Eurythmics, etc., among other things. Its refreshing to hear something you havent heard in a long while. Something that was good then and is still relatable now. All I have to say is that Annie truly is a great artist. I respect the fact that she can write a catchy pop song but also deliver a beautiful ballad and everything in between. In regards to artists today who solely use sex to sell their music, Id consider the nude picture above art and not cheap. Nothing comes across as crass as "Look at me, look at me" and nowhere in the shot is there a tongue sticking out. Not to keep beating a dead horse, but while "Wrecking Ball" may be a #1 hit for Ms. Cyrus, she didnt write it. Im sure Annie had help writing and producing her work as well, but the fact that she can actually play a live instrument gives her much more credit than most artists today in my book. Annie Lennox has staying power and has written songs that have stood the test of time. Miley Cyrus wont.

(Image not showing. Fuck it edit.)
[Edited 10/12/13 12:51pm]

MonsterZeroTwo said:

lastdecember said:

But here in lies the issue, where do we allow it to be OK cause an artist has a zillion times the talent to back it up and also, whos to say whos got talent? Lets take a great example of a label pushing sex on a mega talented artist, HEART, from the second they were dropped and then picked up by EMI in 1984 it was do or die, they had people putting them into outfits fashion etc... and here was a band that has about the best female vocalist ever. But even HEART will admit and they rebelled against it as the 80's ended, that they were selling sexual images to push the songs, cause that band was on its deathbed and all of a sudden they have a number one album and their biggest seller ever and numerous top 10 hits. Everyone was getting paid at the label all the way to the road crew, but as Nancy said as Ann's weight became an issue, Nancy was up front and ANN hidden in the back or covered in black, even her own band members asked her sister to speak to her about dropping weight, so they could make more money. So where do we draw the line? because too many these years spawned HEART's most popular work, still played these days, BUT how they did it was it OK? And just because ANN and the band are mega talented is it ok too?

Good points but IMO, Im just disgusted with IT, Miley Cyrus, the state of popular music today because too many of these so called artists dont write their own songs, dont play any instruments, nonetheless produce the music themselves, contribute any song to society that actually conveys true emotion so all we get are these songs with lyrical content based solely on money, vanity, drugs, and "partying" our apathetic lives away, or know how to convey that raw emotion into a performance that alone would leave you speechless or move you to tears. Every music. Its all starting to rely on and become the same thing. But looks go away. So what are we left with? Nothing but has beens, one hit wonders, but most importantly no long lasting legends. Who really thinks any of Justin Beibers songs will be regarded with the same reverence as When Doves Cry in 20 years? That song is almost 30 years old but is still relevant today. Sure, Prince is naked and crawls out of a bathtub in the video, but to me, Prince wasnt just some poser gyrating around for attention. He seemlessly blended sexuality, true spirituality, controversy, and had all the musical talent in the world to back it up, whereas the majority of whats out there today doesnt. Its fake. Its contrived. Its posers trying to fit in. I dont know if having talent makes it ok. I just want it to end. [Edited 10/8/13 0:30am]

I just have two quick points to make on all this:

1. Miley's song is actually good. It's not for me, but it's infectious, fun, and gets stuck in your head. I think in pop music that's 80% of the battle. It's also the other half of the Madonna example: catchy songs. If you shock me with Papa Don't Preach, I'm yours, but if you shock me with American Life, I'm not.

2. The reason we're talking about this is that Miley's performance was really really bad. It was vulgar, without wit or intelligence, and almost vile to watch. So Annie compares it to pornography. Just because Annie takes her clothes off and puts some boots on doesn't make her a hypocrite. There's a difference between pornography and nudity, and it's "taste".

I realize there's no accounting for taste, but like watching a Reno hooker walk down the boulevard, it's obvious when it's gone. If Miley has a problem, it's that.