Paying Lip Service to Abuse

The other night, I watched the Grammy Awards with my teenage daughter. Well, to be more specific, I watched the first two hours or so (or less, most likely) with her, then excused myself and went to bed while she finished the show without her lovin' mama.

I don't know about y'all, but I just can't stay up that late these days.

Anyway, the presentation was fairly fast-paced, moving quickly from aging metal stars (AC/DC) to pop princesses (Taylor Swift) to significant artistes (Madonna and her bevy of bulls — btw, were those things creepy or what? Almost as creepy as the Material Girl's shiny (dare we say "plastic?") cheekbones.)

There were some inevitable political statements: both Pharrell and Beyonce had backup dancers strike the now infamous and unutterably sad "don't shoot" pose. Prince, channeling his inner Hindu in orange silk pajamas, explained that "Like books and black lives, albums still matter." But, the biggest, most coordinated statement was around the issue of domestic violence.

President Obama, in a prerecorded video, stated that "It’s not okay and it has to stop ... it’s on us, all of us, to create a culture where violence isn’t tolerated, where survivors are supported and where all our young people, men and women, can go as far as their talents and their dreams will take them."

Domestic abuse survivor, activist and poet Brooke Axtell performed a powerful autobiographical written-word piece. And Katy Perry (backed, it seemed by the ghost of Martha Graham), shed her violet hair and dancing sharks for a very serious rendition of "By the Grace of God," a very serious song about a very serious topic.

The whole thing would have been very serious.

If it didn't seem so hypocritical.

Sitting in the audience (and nominated for awards that evening) was Chris Brown, along with his ex-girlfriend (and alleged victim) Rihanna. You may remember that both musicians missed the Grammy Awards back in 2012: Brown, because he was being detained; Rihanna, because her face was smashed in.

And while they may currently be the most popular poster children for domestic violence, their abusive relationship (should I denature it by saying "domestic incident?") is by no means unique or new. The music industry has a long history of physical and sexual abuse. And some of the accused — in many cases, universally acknowledged — perps are among our most beloved idols: Paul McCartney, James Brown, Ike Turner, Tommy Lee, Ozzy Osbourne, Michael Jackson, Cee Lo Green, Slash, Vanilla Ice, Axl Rose, Vince Neil, Lou Rawls, Scott Weiland, even Yanni. 

Apparently, the issue crosses boundaries of age, race and musical genre.

I'm not complaining about the domestic violence PSA inserted into the Grammy Awards. The President's message was important, Axtell's poem was moving and even Perry's kind of dull performance was well-intentioned. But, I would encourage the music industry to take a closer, harder look at itself. Standing up against domestic violence in an awards broadcast is all well and good, but more substantive change needs to take place. Songs and performances that objectify women's bodies, that undermine women's roles as equals, that, in some cases, celebrate rape and violence. These need to be stopped. 

The trouble is, all of the above make money.

So until the recording industry is willing to forego its ill-gotten gains, it all seems like lip service to me.

If you enjoyed this post, I invite you to order a copy of Lovin' the Alien at www.lovinthealien.com.  

Grammy Dress Code

What do my daughter's high school and the Grammy Awards have in common? 

A dress code.

According to the school's handbook (available only online to save trees — or more likely to save a commodity even more endangered, the school's nearly extinct budget), the code is based on the presumption that "all students are young adults who wish to dress and groom themselves appropriately with due consideration to popular convention."

The specific "required standards of dress" include the following:

1. Hooded garments may be worn, but the hood may not be on the wearer's head nor cover the ears or face. Hats or head coverings must be removed upon the request of a staff member.

2. Short-shorts and very short skirts will not be worn.

3. Footwear laces will be tied.

4. Torn and cut clothing will not be worn.

5. Clothing will be neat and appropriately buttoned or zipped at all times.

6. Tube-tops, halters, camisole tops, spaghetti strap (sic) and bare midriffs are unacceptable.

7. Chain wallets and other clothing with chains are not allowed.

8. Underwear that is visible is not allowed.

9. Pajamas are not allowed.

And, last but not least.

10. Sunglasses are not allowed to be worn during the school day in the building.

Apparently, the future's not as bright as we've been led to believe. Especially if you're a girl.

Compare this now to the official memorandum that went out to Grammy Awards attendees from CBS. Desperate to avoid a "wardrobe malfunction," the powers that be at the network were specific and explicit. (A little too explicit if you ask me.) This being the age of the Internet, the memo was — of course — leaked.

"Please be sure that buttocks and female breasts are adequately covered. Thong type costumes are problematic. Please avoid exposing bare fleshy under curves of the buttocks and buttock crack. Bare sides or under curvature of the breasts is also problematic. Please avoid sheer see-through clothing that could possibly expose female breast nipples. Please be sure the genital region is adequately covered so that there is no visible “puffy” bare skin exposure."

What strikes me here (aside from the writer's obvious love for the word "buttock") is its focus on female bits. I'd just as soon avoid male breast nipples too, thank you very much. And what exactly is "visible "puffy" bare skin?" Eeek.

Not to worry though. This is the music industry after all, a group of non-conformists if there ever was one. So, memo or no memo, we were entertained by some pretty extravagant outfits — and some rather creative interpretations of the new rules.

"As you can see, I read the memo," joked Jennifer Lopez to her co-presenter Pitbull. Indeed, there were no buttocks to be seen. Just leg, plenty o' leg. (BTW, if you like the look, you might want to try J-Lo's leg workout, available via Marie Claire here.)

Katy Perry, on the other hand, avoided the "bare side or under curvature of the breasts" dictate by putting it all up front, showcasing her rather buxom bosom with a bejeweled keyhole neckline.

Then there were all the "peek-a-boo" gowns, virtually transparent with the exception of those specific areas (in some cases, only those specific areas) that were so articulately outlined in the memo. This category included dresses worn by Rihanna, Kelly Rowland, Ashanti, D'manti (who is D'manti???) and Alicia Keys. 

On the other hand, Beyonce was tailored and Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood were fairly demure, but that speaks more to their youth and personalities. 

I dare say the infamous memo had nothing to do with it.

Love Hurts — But, It Shouldn't

The Grammy Awards were particularly sad this year, with the news of Whitney Houston's untimely death coming just the day before the music industry's biggest celebration.

We were up in Vermont when we heard about it. One of the teenage boys in our ski house had booted up his laptop so we could watch some videos. "Whitney Houston died," he announced matter-of-factly as his browser came up. There were four adults in the house and we were stunned. We all thought about that beautiful young girl with the glorious voice first. And the troubled middle-aged woman she became second.

With very little time to prepare, the Grammys team pulled together a tribute that was perfect in its simplicity. Accompanied only by a piano, Jennifer Hudson came out and did a soulful version of Houston's most famous (and most heartbreaking) hit "I Will Always Love You." She seemed to choke up a little but made it through, knowing that she was singing for all of us. I was reminded of Elton John's courageous rendition of "Candle in the Wind" at Princess Diana's funeral nearly fifteen years ago. Both brought me to tears.

In hindsight, I'm troubled by an unspoken but pervasive theme that lay beneath the ceremony. For me, the loss of Whitney Houston and other gifted musicians is sad of course, but less disturbing than the fact that the entertainment industry (and society as consumers of that industry) turns a blind eye to violence against women. One might even argue that the industry glorifies it. As a feminist and a mother, I found it interesting that the music world was mourning the loss of a woman who was allegedly beaten and whose drug use (and most likely whose death itself) was the result of an abusive relationship with another musician. At the same time, the Grammys were celebrating the "come back" of Chris Brown, another musician accused of beating up his girlfriend, pop star Rihanna.

Am I overreacting? I don't think so. According to BuzzFeed, here's what girls were tweeting during Brown's Grammy performance Sunday night:

Everyone shut up about Chris brown being a woman beater... Shiiiittt he can beat me up all night if he wants

Chris Brown could serenade me and then punch me in the eye. I'm down for it.

Call me crazy buttttttttt I would let Chris Brown beat me up anyyyy day

ok not gonna lie i'd let chris brown beat the eff out of me

And my personal favorite:

Dude, Chris brown can punch me in the face as much as wants to, just as long as he kisses it ( :

The smiley emoticon is a nice touch, don't you think? My God, what is wrong with these girls?!?

Here's what's wrong. They listen to lyrics that glorify the fusion of sex and pain. They are surrounded by media that objectify women's bodies. They are citizens of a country in which women's health and reproductive rights are being threatened.

Violence against women is marginalized by the very language with which it is defined. With its added modifier, "domestic violence" becomes a less serious form of "violence." It's ASSAULT, people. Whether a person was in a relationship with their assailant before getting a fist in the face is immaterial! It is VIOLENCE.

The same is true with the phrase "date rape." Is a rape somehow less horrific because a woman knows and perhaps had dinner with her rapist? I would argue that psychologically a rape committed by someone with whom a person was building trust would be more traumatic not less. Regardless, and I repeat, it is ASSAULT. It is VIOLENCE.

And, what about Rihanna? Because she herself was the victim of violence, her song "S&M" is irresponsible and offensive. I thought about using a picture of Rihanna's bruised face for this post. (It probably would have meant more readers.) But, I decided to use a photo of a girl who looks like she wants to fight back.

Men need to stop hitting. Women need to defend their sisters — through words, legal action, or in the case of celebrities like Rihanna, through the media and their fan base. The entertainment industry needs to take a stand. The judicial system needs to draft and enforce stricter laws. Mothers need to teach our daughters that if he hits you, he does not love you. Period. Real love does not hurt in that way.

I hope we will someday see violence against women taken seriously. I hope we will someday all agree to a zero tolerance policy where violence against women is concerned. No matter who is involved or how many records he can sell.

But, we are not there yet. In fact, this morning I heard that Rihanna and Chris Brown are collaborating on a song together.

Maybe they should do a cover of Britney Spears' "Hit Me Baby, One More Time."