 |
| http://nydn.us/XhYaFX |
Here’s what I think: Beyoncé was beyond bad. And I don’t
mean her singing. She’s a beautiful woman and a talented vocalist, but her
bustier, bust-a-move performance at the Superbowl left me feeling frustrated with
our culture’s salacious standards for prime-time programming.
Maybe you’re rolling your eyes, thinking this is just
another prudish rant from an evangelical soccer mom. And maybe it is. But the
show ended over an hour ago, and I’m still blushing. I didn’t want my husband
watching that. I didn’t want my daughters watching that. And even though my son
is still prepubescent, I didn’t want him watching it, either. He had left the
room by halftime. Even though he wouldn’t have fully understood the innuendos
of the choreography, I’m pretty sure he would have disapproved the half-naked
gyrations going on on-screen. But could he have averted his eyes? I’m not sure.
Did you?
What makes me mad is that I want to believe our country is
nobler than that, too decent to allow burlesque fill the bill for family
entertainment. We can do better, and we often do. So why not do better on the highest-rated
evening of American television viewing?
What makes me sad is that this weekend tops the U.S.
Attorney General’s charts for sex trafficking, a shameful exploitation of
human rights that nobody in good conscience can publicly support. And yet, we support
sexually explicit exhibitions such as Beyoncé and pals’. We leave our
TVs tuned to the kind of display formerly reserved for bachelor parties,
quietly leering at the leggy ladies like it’s our cultural duty to bear witness,
lest we fail to perform at the water cooler tomorrow.
Shortly after the show, one of my friends (notably, a heterosexual
male) posted a YouTube video of The Ohio State marching band,
advocating for their employment on next year’s Superbowl stage. I applaud his notion,
although I’m too worldly to think the idea will take hold. We’ve clearly
crossed a line in our culture—oh, long ago, I know, I know.
But next year I,
for one, will cross the line from my living room chair to my television’s off button.
The purity of my family’s thoughts and the innocence of my children matters more to me than being in the know
about what the Superbowl stars did—or didn’t—wear.
10 comments:
I totally agree with you. At less than a minute in, I said, "this is disgusting" and my son (age 11 1/2) asked me to turn it off. We turned it off and never turned the game back on. We decided that we would watch the good commercials tomrrow. How have we gotten to the point where we think this is OK family viewing?
Thanks for the feedback, Marcy. Lesson learned, I suppose. But I was so worked up about it that my husband suggested I share my opinion publicly. A very smart man once said: “If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity.” (Albert Einstein)
I only watched bits and pieces of it, but I agree the choreography wasn't appealing. I don't think it was "sexually explicit", though.
But that's Beyonce's stock in trade; you don't book her for a halftime show without knowing what you're going to get.
Her music appeals to all ages (there are countless videos of kids dancing to "Single Ladies"), but the choreography is very adult. It's a bit of a dichotomy.
I agree that her music is catchy. Just the other day, I posted a picture my first-grader had drawn of "Mommy and me" dancing, and "Single Ladies" was the first tune that came to my mind (which prompted my caption, which I believe prompted a wave of "Likes" on Facebook).
I wonder if you're also right about my use of the word "explicit." Should I have said "implicit" instead? I imply no sarcasm. I really do wonder how much pelvic thrusting and writhing around on the floor...I mean stage...constitutes explicit-ness versus implicit-ness. Any wordsmiths or cultural commentators out there who can clarify the difference...?
My daughter (9 years old) loves Beyonce, and was so annoyed with the show she turned away from the TV and started to color instead of watching. She knew all the lyrics, and sang, but wasn't interested in the stripper show.
It's been a long time since I've watched the superbowl halftime show, or the superbowl for that matter. i can't stand watching that stuff, and i don't want my daughter seeing it, and definitely not my husband. We recorded it and started watching it an hour into it so we could fast forward through commercials and half time. it's pretty sad when a football game because something that is more sexual than an average nights tv line up. i agree that it's only going to get worse with what is explicitly shown during the superbowls. i too wish more talent was showcased, and less body.
I've actually seen worse halftime shows. I wasn't watching it with my children, so perhaps that is key, but I found myself more impressed at her amazing vocal skills than too badly offended at the dancing. There were a few times that the movements were sexual enough to make me bit uncomfortable, but overall, I liked it better than some shows I've seen that feature both female and male dancers together, practically copulating on the stage. 2004's infamous "Better get you naked by the end of this song" moment, with Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson, ending in the "wardrobe malfunction", is one that comes to mind...
I really appreciate the thoughtful discussion here. I think it was the combination of lingerie and choreography that offended my maternal sensibilities (although I focused my complaint on the dance moves in the original post). As I said to someone who posted her remarks on Facebook: "Beyonce *is* a beautiful and, yes, *sexy* woman whose talent as a musician should be the focus of our attention--not her crotch!" (gasp--did I really use that word?! yes, but among adults)
It's sad to me that Beyoncé sold out. She does have a beautiful voice, and the focus should have been on her vocal talent and stage presence.
Instead, she looked like a "boy toy." There's nothing empowering or liberating about that.
Post a Comment