Parody as Feminist Response

Sarah Wyer

FLR 418: Gender and Folklore

Dr. Lisa Gilman

5 June 2014

Wyer 2

The relationship between women and music is paradoxical. Music, as a form of cultural expression, has served women as both an oppressive force and a pathway for liberation.

Although this complex duality requires a far larger text to explore and discuss its intricacies, I propose to look at how the role of parody, specifically musical parody, provides women with a socially sanctioned means of responding to issues, representations, and messages in mainstream culture. Parody, in this capacity, serves as a framework from which unofficial culture can respond to and, often, critique mainstream culture. The specific interest of this paper is looking at feminist response to the hegemonic system of patriarchy via parody, with the aid of research and fieldwork. To do this, it is necessary to answer two questions about parody: what is it, and what is its function?

There are a multitude of definitions of parody. It has been defined by Linda Hutcheon in a postmodernist vein as “a form of repetition with ironic critical distance, marking difference rather than similarity” (Hutcheon, A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-century Art

Forms 2000), by Joseph Dane as “a form of criticism and thus…generically distinct from its targets” (Dane 1988), and separated into two definitions by Martha Bayless as “(1) imitating and distorting the distinguishing characteristics of literary genres, styles, authors, or specific texts

(textual parody); or (2) imitating, with or without distortion, literary genres, styles, authors, or texts while in addition satirizing or focusing on nonliterary customs, events, or persons (social parody)” (Bayless 1996). It has lived with fluid differentiation within literature, music, theater, and pop culture, serving as a means to not only poke fun at (often popular) content, but also to critique it. The philosopher and critic Mikhail Bakhtin wrote on parody, saying that parodic

“discourse…has a twofold direction—it is directed both toward the referential object of speech, as in ordinary discourse, and toward another’s discourse, toward someone else’s speech” (Rose Wyer 3

1993). This multi-directional characteristic of parody is important—it is not just for an audience, it is a response to the original form off which is it based, especially in the sense of critique.

The practice of parody has ancient roots. Martha Bayless is careful to separate textual parody from social parody in her book, Parody in the Middle Ages. She argues that Latin parodies have been around since A.D. 500, but that most medieval parodies were focused on humor, entertainment, and imitating large and well-known literary texts of the time, like the

Bible. It maintained the safe space of social sanction despite its more literary leaning, but

Bayless mentions that the use of parody as social critique was not a primary function of medieval parody (Bayless 1996). She claims that “medieval Latin parody was a widespread, uncontroversial, and often sophisticated literary form” (Bayless 1996). Margaret Rose cites parody as first appearing in the fourth century B.C., a term used by Aristotle. Aristophanes, the comedic Greek playwright, used the ancient understanding of parody to imitate the dramatic style of his contemporaries1 in new plays, famously The Frogs (Rose 1993).

Parody continues as a popular genre today. Official culture has, in a way, incorporated it as a tool of self-deprecation. Widely watched television shows like Saturday Night Live2 and

MAD TV have made names for themselves as engines of parody and satire. A key component to this type of official parody critique is ridicule. South Park, a television show veering into the grotesque in its humorous and often socially inappropriate method of satire, is a prime example of how ridicule is used as commentary. South Park’s low-cost animation style allows them to quickly produce episodes that comment on the latest current events. Their parodic style, however, is highly reliant on ridicule and humor.

1 Aristophanes’ contemporaries include the highly regarded writers Euripides, Sophocles, and Aeschylus, the three Greek tragedians. 2 Saturday Night Live (SNL) has been on the air since 1975. Wyer 4

As we saw with the varying definitions of parody (and there are, of course, many more), the nature of this form is slippery. It has been defined, redefined, and redefined again as movements within history and theory (modernist, postmodernist) have adopted it as a reflection of their cultural and social concerns. Textual parody, so defined for us by Bayless, has a vested interest in literature and tangible texts. It is to this realm of parody that Don Quixote belongs, that the ancient Satyr plays3 were formed within. But although this shows that official culture can comment on itself, it does nothing to indicate the critical position of unofficial or marginalized culture. Therefore, it is to Bayless’ definition of social parody that we turn.

As Linda Hutcheon mentions in her book, A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of

Twentieth-century Art Forms, “parody changes with the culture, its forms, its relations to its

‘targets,’ and its intentions are not going to be the same in North America today as they were in eighteenth-century England” (Hutcheon, A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth- century Art Forms 2000). Parody has to be fluid in order to survive as a form of cultural expression. As movements rise and fall in the landscape of the world (specifically the United

States of America for the purpose of this paper), the ability of parody to respond has been an important constant. Like jokes, parody is a safe realm within which to operate. Parody is a frame, a socially sanctioned way of presenting commentary. A frame indicates certain things that are framed as being a particular genre of identification (Murphy 2001). Parody is a genre, a categorization of the social form of imitation with difference that parody, whether textual or social, is. Although it is not always used in this manner, parody offers a venue for marginalized communities to respond to mainstream culture, news, or incidents. For the purpose of this paper, although I have touched upon the literary usage and relationship, I will focus on Hutcheon’s

3 Satyr plays were a form of parody, or tragicomedy (joking tragedy), in Ancient Greece, where dramatic plays were performed with the alteration of dressing all the actors up as satyrs. From the Encyclopedia Britannica. Wyer 5 definition of postmodernist parody, that of “repetition with critical distance that allows ironic signaling of difference at the very heart of similarity” (Hutcheon, A Theory of Parody: The

Teachings of Twentieth-century Art Forms 2000). Parody is granted a three-fold lifespan, then, beginning with ancient, transitioning to modern, and then becoming redefined in post-modern theory. Hutcheon is firm in regards to looking at parody through a postmodern lens, claiming that “parody is a perfect postmodern form…it paradoxically both incorporates and challenges that which is parodies” (Hutcheon, A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction 1988).

While ridicule is a popular reason to use parody within the realm of literature, art, and music, it does not speak to all forms of parody. Parody provides a safe space, a socially sanctioned framework, from which to critique mainstream culture. As Hutcheon says, parody serves “as an authorized transgression of convention” (Hutcheon, A Poetics of Postmodernism:

History, Theory, Fiction 1988). This space is instrumental for communities on the peripheries.

A Hutcheon says, “parody took on the kind of edge that was also evident in theories of both how postcolonial texts have ‘written back’ to Empire and also how indigenous artists in the Americas have resignified and adapted dominant discourses to create new hybrid forms” (Hutcheon, A

Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-century Art Forms 2000). Parody is a genre of response, but who uses it and why are ever fluid. With YouTube, which is a valuable venue for expression, marginalized groups have the opportunity to reach a broad audience with their critiques and messages. The widespread accessibility that of Internet (especially through sites like YouTube and Facebook) makes the promotion of feminist messages via parody easier. They are able to reach a larger audience by posting a parody on YouTube, but also face the possibility of obscurity. A video can go viral—as seen with the two parodies “Defined Lines” and “A Wyer 6

Needed Response”—or get lost in the abundant turnover of new media. Other sites contribute to this as well, like Upworthy4, blogs, and Twitter.

The definition of “viral video” is not set, but it has been suggested that in order to be considered “viral”, a YouTube video must reach 5 million views within the first 3-7 days that it is posted. Older definitions state that a mere million views is enough to constitute a viral video, but as the Internet has become more accessible to the world’s population viewings have spiked

(O'Neill 2011). Using this definition of viral, only Samantha Stendal’s “A Needed Response” fulfills the requirements of the term. However, “Defined Lines” is so close to 5 million views that I am going to consider it viral for the purpose of this paper.

Figure 1 "Blurred Lines", RobinThickeVEVO The Law Revue Girls and “Defined Lines”

4 Upworthy.com is a website that posts and promotes videos. Wyer 7

One of the most-viewed parodies of Robin Thicke’s March 2013 music video “Blurred

Lines” comes from the University of Auckland, New Zealand. Published in August of 2013,

“Defined Lines” now has over 4 million views on YouTube, 62 thousand “likes”, and 9 thousand

“dislikes.” There is a plethora of other parodies of Thicke’s controversial music video, but

“Defined Lines” is a league apart in terms of production and, most importantly, viewership. The parody also has over 45 thousand comments (and counting), which indicates just how contentious this response to “Blurred Lines” is.

“Blurred Lines” is a collaboration featuring singer Robin Thicke, rapper T. I., and singer- songwriter Pharrell Williams. The song is considered part of the pop genre and contains lively, bubbly, and consistent beats. There does not appear to be any use of musicological elements, such as text painting, where the musical notation mimics the lyrics to emphasize certain points in the song. The beat was likely created to be catchy, with little thought to the relationship between the instrumentals and the lyrics. The music itself is repetitive and strophic (where the music repeats by the text changes), and as thus appears rather uninventive. The number three does appear several times in the song, with the repeated “Hey, hey, hey”, “I know you want it”, the number of men and women in the music video, and the dice at the beginning of the video displaying the number three. This may be intentional, but could be nothing more than the

Western predisposition towards the number three, as evidenced in ideas of the Christian Trinity, the three-fold nature of man5, the three primary colors, and other occurrences of the number that permeate Western culture. The subject matter in the music video and the lyrics are what has spurred most of the criticism against this song, having been repeatedly linked to rape culture and misogyny.

The lyrics are suggestive, the repeated line of “I know you want it” accused by various

5 The three-fold nature of man includes Spirit, Soul, and Body. Wyer 8 media backlashes of placing women in a position of sexual availability based on the interest of men. There is also a short albeit blatant reference to women as animals, implying a relationship between the feminine and nature, referencing an idea that lives within the gender binary:

OK now he was close, tried to domesticate you But you're an animal, baby, it's in your nature

The reference is even made between “animal” and “nature.” The use of the word “domesticate” suggests a man’s cultural and intellectual power over women, who are “animals” and beholden to their “nature.” Another section of the song lyrics makes an assumption that the way a woman touches a man means that sex can be expected:

But you're a good girl The way you grab me Must wanna get nasty Go ahead, get at me

“Must wanna get nasty” makes the hasty generalization that men can expect a sexual motive from women who “grab” them. The reference to being a “good girl” also enforces the gender binary within which our popular culture operates, assigning women as either “good” or “bad”, a perspective of duality that declines any broader explanation of sexual behavior for women.

T.I.’s rap is equally disheartening, stripping a woman of her personhood and addressing her only in terms of her body:

Yeah, I had a bitch, but she ain't bad as you So hit me up when you pass through I'll give you something big enough to tear your ass in two Swag on, even when you dress casual I mean it's almost unbearable

The woman he is addressing has been reduced to an ass. T.I. even inserts an effort to conform to gender binary values of masculinity, mentioning the size of his penis in terms that sound, frankly, rather painful for the woman involved. He describes the woman’s appearance as Wyer 9

“unbearable,” so that no matter how she dresses herself she is not safe from his desire. “I hate them lines” refers to the “blurred lines” of the song, which have been critiqued as those that exist between consent and rape. The Law Revue Girls’ parody is titled “Defined Lines” to address this very issue, arguing that the lines between consent and rape, or at the very least between yes and no, are defined instead of “blurry.”

There is not much that Adelaide Dunn, the lyricist for “Defined Lines”, leaves to misinterpretation. Her lyrics are blunt, critical, and in many cases aggressively feminist. She begins by broadening the “female box”, kicking out Thicke’s limited word choice of “good” or

“bad.” She defies that description, saying instead:

We ain't good girls: We are scholastic, Smart and sarcastic, Not fucking plastic.

Dunn also addresses the assumption in Thicke’s lyrics that women convey consent when they touch a man:

If you wanna get nasty, Just don't harass me: You can't just grab me. That's a sex crime! Yeah we don't want it - It's chauvinistic. You're such a bigot!

The lines “You can’t just grab me. That’s a sex crime!” express an attempt to define Thicke’s

“blurred lines,” making a claim that they are not an adequate substitution for verbal consent.

Dunn’s message is, to my ears, clearest in her lyrics:

Need a universal role reversal, In real life not a dress rehearsal. Gotta resist all the gender roles, Time to put misogyny on parole, Wyer 10

Put exploitation on probation, Time for you to witness our liberation! There's more to life than penetration, And sexual discrimination.

Here Dunn echoes a very apparent physical difference between her video and Thicke’s: the men are in their underwear while the women are dressed. In Thicke’s video, the opposite is true.

There is even an unrated version of “Blurred Lines” that has the women topless while the men remain fully clothed. Even the opening scene of Thicke’s music video has him laying down in a bed with twisted sheets, next to a woman who is far less dressed than he is. Clothing can serve as a symbol of power, where the three men in Thicke’s video are dressed and allowed to have a voice, whereas the women are either naked or dressed skimpily and do not speak apart from one single line: “Meow.” Dunn’s lyrics are, then, a call to recognize sexual discrimination and the placement of women and men into a gender binary system6.

Dunn’s imitation of “Blurred Lines” uses the same popular culture that supports Thicke to critique him, her lyrics fueled by biting irony when she sings:

You wanna box gap? Show me your six pack. Wanna landing strip? You'd better get ripped. I apologise if you think my lines are crass, Tell me how it feels to get verbally harassed.

She flips the pop culture standard of judging women solely based on their appearance, a theme in

“Blurred Lines” that occurs in the same unimaginatively continuous way as the instrumentals.

This use of parody and irony is a theoretical tool, “certainly women and Afro-American artists’ use of parody to challenge the male white tradition from within, to use irony to implicate and yet to critique, is distinctly paradoxical and postmodern” (Hutcheon, A Poetics of Postmodernism:

History, Theory, Fiction 1988).

6 Dunn is from New Zealand, and as thus has a slightly different way of spelling some words. I have left all of her spelling and word choices alone so as to better represent her. Wyer 11

Given the popularity of “Defined Lines,” I was lucky to be able to interview Dunn about the parody. She was willing to help me, and answered my questions promptly. Dunn mentioned that parody is one of her favorite forms of creative expression, and when I asked her why she chose parody for “Defined Lines,” she said “we chose a parody because it's law revue tradition - it's really effective to show people lyrics and a melody that they are well familiar with and a humourous video” (Dunn 2014). Dunn’s law school at the University of Auckland in New

Zealand holds a Law Revue show. Parodies are a common form of comedy performed at this law revue, and Dunn and her friends wanted to “go all out” (Dunn 2014) and create a music video parody for the comedy skit show. Dunn mentioned that, while music video parodies were popular, they general dealt in terms of sexist and misogynistic themes. She wanted to strike back with something hyper-feminist.

Even so, Dunn admitted during the filming of “Defined Lines” that she did not consider it a feminist video at the time. It was designed originally to be angry and exemplify a hardcore flavor of feminism, and there are lines the Dunn said she would probably not have included if she had known the video would get global recognition. There is one lyric that mentions castration, and a scene where a vibrator is shoved into a man’s mouth. The project of “Defined

Lines” started as a casual, comedic skit for their law revue, but turned into something part more powerful.

I asked Dunn if she was expecting negative comments, and she replied that she absolutely was expecting a backlash against “angry feminism.” She cringed when the video was uploaded to YouTube, thinking of the comments that were sure to follow. Although many of them were easy to brush off, there were a few comments that bothered her. One anonymous YouTube commentor did not like that the video had, in his mind, middle-class white women. Dunn Wyer 12 explained that she and another member of their trio are mixed race, but it bothered her because that was not the message she was trying to send through the parody. “And as for the wealthy privilege thing, I'd respond to them: yes we are lucky enough to be educated etc, so don't we have a duty to use that privilege/platform to speak out about social issues? ‘Privileged’ people face other various discriminations, and I think everyone who desires should point out such discriminations whenever they can” (Dunn 2014).

Access to the Internet was a huge factor “Defined Lines” going viral, and I asked Dunn how she thought said access, as well as anonymity, might contribute to the ability for marginalized culture to respond to things that they saw in the world. Dunn answered:

With access to the Internet becoming more widespread the web becomes more of a global community which allows for so many more voices - less and less we garner ideas about marginalised groups from (unintentionally) biased media coming out of mainly the USA and the UK. But on the flipside, the Internet provides yet another breeding ground for hate, and confusion… Suddenly everyone has an avenue with which to express their opinions to the whole world, and it was baffling seeing the variety of responses to the video (Dunn 2014).

Accessibility is a double-edged sword, allowing groups on the periphery to step in and comment on popular culture, but at the same time opening the platform of the Internet to very negative responses. Messages of hatred and intolerance can be spread just as quickly as those of resistance for social normativity.

I asked Dunn if she thought “Defined Lines” was a success, to which she replied yes, adding, “But most rewardingly, we alerted a lot of people to the engrained, subconscious, unseen and uncriticised misogyny in pop culture (and specifically, Blurred Lines). And we made some people laugh! Which is awesome” (Dunn 2014). Despite the original intention of making

“Defined Lines” purely for comedic purposes for the law revue, Dunn and her friends found meaning in their parody and value in its message. Wyer 13

Figure 2 "A Needed Response" by Samantha Stendal

Samantha Stendal and “A Needed Response”

Samantha Stendal is a University of Oregon student and the creator of the viral video “A

Needed Response”, 25 seconds of commentary aimed towards the Steubenville7 rapists (and any other rapists). She wrote, directed, shot, and edited the film herself. Stendal’s video was posted on March 22, 2013, and currently has over 8 million views, 37 thousand “likes”, 15 hundred

“dislikes”, and about 10 thousand comments. The video was posted to Upworthy and went viral.

Stendal received national recognition for her video and won the Peabody Award (an award recognizing distinguished public service via media) in 2013. “A Needed Response” is the first viral video from YouTube to win a Peabody Award. This spurred a flurry of interviews and

7 The Steubenville rape case took place in Steubenville, Ohio, a small town. Two teenage high school football players sexually assaulted a 16-year old girl while she was incapacitated. They then bragged about the rape to a few other boys in a video. Both teens were found delinquent and sentenced to serve time in juvenile jail. ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/US/steubenville-football-players-guilty-ohio-rape-trial/story?id=18748493 Wyer 14 appearances for Stendal, who spoke on major news networks like CNN about the social statement of “A Needed Response.”

The video begins with a man facing the camera. A woman is passed out on the couch behind him. He smiles and asks the audience, “Guess what I’m going to do?” He exits, only to return with a pillow and a blanket. He places the pillow beneath the woman’s head and drapes the blanket over her. He grabs an end table from somewhere and sets a beverage onto it. He looks back into the camera and says, “Real men treat women with respect.” Then the camera cuts out.

Stendal’s video constitutes as parody, since her intention was to present the piece in a way that modeled, visually, the “home” video that was released surrounding the Steubenville rape. The boys were with other male friends, making jokes about rape and referencing the girl they had recently raped, and it was being filmed by a mostly silent member of the conversational circle. The video was released, contributing to the sentencing of the two football players who committed the rape. Stendal didn’t watch the video, but read about it, read the dialogue, just couldn’t bring herself to watch it. What transpired in the video of the rapists bragging and joking about their crime upset her, and in response she made a video with the outcome that she would have wanted to see. “I did want [“A Needed Response”] to look like one of those videos. It was designed to give people an assumption” (Stendal 2014). As imitation with difference is a definition of parody, I consider Stendal’s video a parody. It was designed to replicate the incident but change the outcome.

Stendal’s video is less about sexual objectification than Dunn’s, and in its incredibly short length manages to comment on rape culture, sexual violence, and the accepted normalcy of gendered stereotypes. She is not alone in this public battle. In their book Disruptive Divas: Wyer 15

Feminism, Identity, and Popular Music, Lori Burns and Melisse Lafrance analyze the music of a few women musicians within popular culture, but also offer insight into the perpetuation of rape culture and sexual violence, saying that “gendered forms of violence are not only the products of a patriarchal and misogynistic society; they are also the conditions in and through which patriarchal societies sustain themselves” (Burns and Lafrance 2002). It is this idea of conditions that bothers Stendal. The Steubenville rape represents this idea that forced sexual intercourse with a passed-out girl is a normal thing to expect within our society. Knowing that the

Steubenville case disturbed Stendal, I asked her what her specific motivation was for creating this video, and she replied:

Well one, the [Steubenville] case was ridiculous in itself. Two, the coverage of it was the worst I’ve seen. Like, CNN’s report on it looked like an Onion story. It was awful. I was just getting really pissed off on how the conversation was focused on what was going to happen in the boys’ futures, [suggestions] that it was the girl’s fault, I was like… you know, instead of having these standards where we expect that when a girl gets drunk she might get raped, why don’t we have the standard that when someone gets drunk, someone takes care of them? The fact that having a video where the guy takes care of the girl can be controversial, can be weird, can prompt the reaction of ‘oh, we never thought that could be an option…’ That’s sad. That’s really sad. It’s sad that the expectation is that when you have the guy in front of the camera and the girl in the background, people naturally think that he’s going to rape her (Stendal 2014).

Stendal saw the Internet as an open venue for presenting her opinion, and, more important, starting a new conversation about Steubenville.

Indeed, the Internet, especially sites like YouTube, present an opportunity for a multiplicity of voices to express themselves. Marginalized groups can use social media sites to spread opinions and reactions, but also to start conversations and solicit responses from the general public. Internet communities pop up within social media networks as people from around the world share messages with one another. In his book Parody and Taste in Postwar

American Television Culture, Ethan Thompson touches on the explosive power of access that the Wyer 16

Internet provides, saying “just as people passed around copies of MAD [magazine] in the 1950s, now they forward hypertext links to one another via e-mail or post a video to Facebook for their friends to see. The Internet technically enables the distribution, but these communities of fans and friends are the real networks” (Thompson 2011).

Given the extent of Internet networks, especially considering how viral “A Needed

Response” became, I asked Stendal if she got the reactions that she was expecting from the anonymous public. She said, “I get tons of Internet trolls. I’ve gotten both negative and positive responses” (Stendal 2014). In terms of anonymous comments, left on the YouTube video, connected to the person posting them only in the very tentative form of a screen name, Stendal’s video has thousands.

The comments are interesting. I haven’t read all of them because it’s the Internet, and you kind of have to take everything with a grain of salt. I almost took down the comments for the video because I was worried about comments being triggering, but I thought it was really important to show that conversation. The video can be impactful, but seeing people calling up controversy… All these debates online about the video, and there are some silly ones like ‘oh, you shouldn’t put her neck at that angle’, but then you have the people that say ‘oh, well he’s so beta for taking care of her, and he’s such a weakling, and he’s just trying to impress her so that he can get in her pants’, that kind of dialogue is what is interesting to take a look at, because those are little micro aggressions that really do have an impact on how we view ourselves as a society. You’re always going to get a backlash with something that goes big, but I think the comments really show that we have a long ways to go.

Despite anonymity, despite the heterogeneous folk group that is YouTube, the comments still epitomize an unofficial response via expressive culture. Whether the responses are negative or positive, the landscape of YouTube is open to all of them.

Anonymity, however, does have an impact on how people will present themselves and their opinions. Stendal realizes this, saying “I think that anonymity has a huge, huge, huge impact. If it was on someone’s Facebook there would be a much nicer conversation. That’s why

YouTube comments are known as the worst comments. You can just click out, or sign out. You Wyer 17 don’t have to listen to the people that are fighting against you” (Stendal 2014). Parody can ignite this style of commentary, sometimes called “trolling”, because it often critiques issues that are entrenched within a society. For Stendal, addressing how she thinks men should treat women was also addressing the ingrained hegemony, the underlying system of power, within America.

Ideas that challenge the dominant hegemonic system, which in the U.S.A. is patriarchal, spur controversy. “We were really surprised that people could take [“A Needed Response”] negatively, or could call it controversial, or call it a bad thing,” Stendal said. She admitted that, although she was expecting some negative criticism because of the nature of YouTube comments, she was surprised, and a little taken aback, by how many people were displeased with or offended by her video. But because “A Needed Response” is challenging the current hegemonic patriarchal system in America, a system that values male characteristics and contributions to society more than feminine ones, it resists the dominant culture. And “resistance is never unproblematic” (Burns and Lafrance 2002).

Nevertheless, Stendal is hopeful that her efforts to add to the conversation about sexual assault and rape culture will perpetuate this much-needed discussion. I asked her if she thought that “A Needed Response” was successful, and she paused for a moment before answering. “I think it was a success at least in getting people to talk about it. What I wanted to do was start a conversation that stopped looking at victim blaming, and started looking at how we should treat women better, and that did happen. So that, to me, was my success. All I wanted was to put my opinion up there because I was so ticked off that I didn’t already see it online” (Stendal 2014).

Stendal, in a feminist vein, successfully used YouTube and parody as a form of commentary.

She used performance, especially, to communicate her message, which required a certain degree of competence to understand. Competence, the ability of an audience to interpret what the Wyer 18 performance is (based on social norms and language), can assist in the spreading of unofficial culture broadcasts (Bauman 1992). There are multicausal factors to why a YouTube parody might go viral, but competence is surely one of them.

I asked Stendal if she would use the platform of YouTube next time she wants to join a cultural conversation. Did this means of getting her message out, of making a statement, give her the results she wanted? “We have this platform, with social media, to actually express our thoughts and get our point across, and that’s why I’m so thankful that we live in an age where I can pick up a camera, shoot something, and put it online for millions of people to see. We are starting to change how we look at our online media” (Stendal 2014).

Figure 3 "Let it Go Parody--Feminist Frozen" by Shantini

Wyer 19

Shantini and “Let it Go Parody—Feminist Frozen”

Shantini is an actor and a singer who released her parody “Let it Go Parody—Feminist

Frozen” on YouTube March 15, 2014. It currently has about 29 hundred views, 44 “likes”, 11

“dislikes”, and 13 comments. Shantini’s parody did not receive the reception she was hoping for, but she considers her parody a success because she wanted to get her message out and make the comments that she was not seeing elsewhere, much like Stendal. Shantini was aware that her message could be considered contentious. Coming up with a creative way to share her critique of Disney’s Frozen was a challenge she faced, as she wanted people to not ignore what she was saying simply because it was contrary. Stendal faced this problem too, and mentioned that she made “A Needed Response” 25 seconds long because “people have short attention spans, and no one wants to be lectured at” (Stendal 2014). Shantini shared her thoughts on finding the right way to present her opinion:

I think there's a sweet spot on sharing your opinion about something - one end is the knee-jerk reaction where you try to tear something down and alienate people, and the other end is just letting it fade into the back of your mind and not ever speaking up. Somewhere in the middle is realizing that maybe you have something important to say, or maybe you have a unique point of view, and thinking through how you can share it that will actually make people listen instead of immediately turning them off. (Klaassen 2014)

Setting her commentary to Disney’s “Let It Go” gave Shantini a safe space from which to voice her concerns.

Shantini chose to be a little less blunt than Dunn or Stendal. Her lyrics were suggestive, more of a gentle prod in the direction of her critique than a blatant statement. Her lyrics:

Idina's power ballad Shows you don't need to conform But if you want that freedom You should sexily transform

Wyer 20

Shantini is saying that, despite the hype surrounding Frozen’s iconic song, “Let It Go,” as a new anthem of self-love for women, it is not a perfect message. The character Elsa, who sings this ballad, goes through a transformation where she lets down her hair, changes outfits in favor of something slinkier and sexier, and as thus equates self-acceptance with a makeover.

Shantini’s parody is a performance, relying on audience competence to successfully pull the critique from her reworking of the song lyrics. Not only must the audience be familiar with the song “Let It Go” to understand many of the points Shantini makes in her parody, but also knowledge of the public response to the song is necessary. In his book The Genius of Parody:

Imitation and Originality in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century English Literature, Robert

Mack claims that “the parodist can transform his or her target text…the manner in which the truly perceptive parodist can respond not only to the formal and linguistic cues of his or her original, but can no less certainly tap into the deepest meanings that rest beneath and behind those cues” (Mack 2007). Shantini does this, mimicking the musical character of “Let It Go” while she transforms the message of the song into her critique of Frozen, and of Disney overall.

One of her main points is apparent in her lyrics:

A princess who is just like you If you're white

Here Shantini actually pauses in the song and lets the sweeping rise and fall of the music carry on without her, asking, “Oh, are you not white?” with the saccharine bite of imitation. She looks discouraged and then brightens, slipping into a musical movement where she offers Disney princesses of color in a manner that suggests she is highly critical of Disney’s small portion of non-white princesses:

The Princess and the Frog, Aladdin and Mulan Once they came out we knew all racism was gone Wyer 21

And now that Frozen tells us women can be strong If I'm thin and beautiful I know I can belong

The movies that Shantini mentions have been criticized for racism, Aladdin especially. She ridicules Disney simply by stating whimsically that these movies positively impacted larger social issues like racism and feminism. Again, competence comes into play here. The listener must be aware of the controversies surrounding the effect that Disney movies can have on children, how Disney offers ideas of normalcy that impact children’s perception of the world and, very importantly, of others. Also in this lyric, Shantini mentions that women can be strong, but only if they are beautiful and thin. This once again reinforces the gender binary instead of breaking away from it. The strength of the female characters in Frozen is made okay because the women in question are thin and beautiful, so they are still, in some fashion, adhering to gendered ideas of what femininity is.

Shantini’s parodic message takes more close reading to interpret than Stendal’s or

Dunn’s, but still manages to adhere to the function of social parody. Her video had fewer views than with “Defined Lines” or “A Needed Response,” not close to the 5 million views O’Neill dictated as necessary for a video to be considered viral.. I asked Shantini is she considered her parody to be a success, and she replied, “I do. For me, the main purpose was to share my feelings about the film and have fun doing it, which was definitely accomplished” (Klaassen

2014). Parody offers a safe space for the resistance to, the subversion of, or the response to societal norms and popular culture.

Comment War, “Defined Lines” As Shantini mentions, “the downside is the Internet gives everyone an equal voice, including people with prejudice and hate that they’re desperate to spread around. With the sheer volume, I think it’s really hard for marginalized voices to stand out, and for intelligent argument to be considered” (Klaassen 2014). I certainly found this to be the case. Participating in the comment war within the comments for “Defined Lines” was akin to watching a pack of rabid dogs repeatedly throw themselves with frenzied hostility at anyone who disagreed with them.

One girl, Izzy, in particular doggedly continued to reply to the misogynist comments that were flung initially at “Defined Lines,” then at feminism, and finally at her personally. The range of what people found to berate her, to my eyes perfectly reasonable, comments was astounding.

Academia is sometimes sheltering, I think, giving students a glimpse into what feminism strives for, the usually polite and restrained debates that occur in scholarly articles, and an informed insight and toolkit to better perceive and participate in the world. Taking my training, as it were, and stepping into the minefield of a YouTube comment section was a little horrifying.

There seem to be unspoken rules in the YouTube comment section on how to behave poorly. The strength of your position is irrelevant, only pointing out the weakness in the opinions of others seems to boost one’s own comments. No sources are usually given for wildly controversial statements. No matter how civil or polite another commentor might be there is no social standard that demands a polite response from you, or any level of respect for the opinions of others. I often wondered while engaging in this research whether people went to YouTube comments just for the apparent pleasure of being rude to strangers.

As “Defined Lines” had, by far, the greatest number of comments (upwards of 45 thousand) between the three parodies, I decided to jump into the first few negative comment Wyer 23 threads for the video. I soon broke the rules of YouTube commenting. When the thread’s OP8 decried rape culture as a myth, I responded as politely as I could and provided a plethora of articles on rape culture in the United States of America from reputable sources. OP argued with me for a short while, but as I posted more and more sources, he started ignoring me altogether.

He would specifically avoid my comments but continue to attack everyone else’s.

In his book Parody: Critical Concepts versus Literary Practices, Aristophanes to Sterne,

Joseph Dane says, “Because of its marginal or noncanonical nature, parody…is more than the irruption of an unofficial language onto an official language. The generic standards of the parodied genre are undefined. And parody is productive of the very standards it ostensibly subverts” (Dane 1988). The idea of parody reproducing the culture which it resists is seen, I believe, in the comment wars that occur in YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and wherever else on social media. The dominant culture, taking perhaps unknowing offence to a message of resistance, wavers the saber by lashing out in the comments section. This was certainly true of

“Defined Lines,” where the very patriarchal, hegemonic ideologies that Dunn and her friends tried to subvert were reborn (or at least renewed) in the comment section of their video. As such, it is important to look at Internet commentary as a form of folklore, as the unofficial carving out space to respond, in this case, to the unofficial cultural expression of parody.

Conclusion

The three parodies in my fieldwork (“Defined Lines”, “A Needed Response”, and “Let it

Go Parody—Feminist Frozen”) all include messages that are designed to critique mainstream culture, whether it be sexism, rape culture, or preconceived notions of physical worth. Back to

8 OP stands for “Original Poster,” the person who started the comment thread by creating the first comment in that particular thread. Wyer 24

The Genius of Parody, Mack quotes Ella Shohat in relation to parodic discourse, saying that

“’Parody is especially appropriate for the discussion of ‘centre’ and ‘margins’ since—due to its historical marginalization, as well as its capacity for appropriating and critically transforming existing discourses—parody becomes a means of renewal and demystification, a way of laughing away outmoded forms of thinking’” (Mack 2007). Mack’s comment of “laughing away outmoded forms of thinking” is an ideal, something that the feminist videos discussed here might wish were true. This is where competence comes back into the picture, where the anonymous

YouTube reception of the parody is important in determining its success. Sharing a video helps to build its viral-ability, and, as Joon Soo Lim and Guy Golan point out, people are more willing to share a YouTube video if they agree with its message (Lim and Golan 2011). This also puts the expectation of competence onto the performer, as they are tasked with being able to communicate their message clearly (Bauman 1992).

Social parody, to return to Bayless, is an important form of folklore because it serves as a reflection of what people care about or believe to be true. Being able to use parody as a means for communication can help to lift the voices of marginalized communities. Music contributes because setting new words or meanings to an established and well-known song increases the likelihood that the general anonymous public will be interested in it. Popular music can become poached and reworked by unofficial culture to alter the context of a song. While the Internet provides those on the periphery of mainstream culture a platform to share their opinions, to resist the hegemonic system within which they live, it can also halt the success of a parody. The outbreak of comment wars on controversial videos (and parodies are usually controversial) can drag a video up in viewership, or bring it down. Being able to “like” or “dislike” a video creates a system of value judgment, where the mindset and personal agendas of thousands of anonymous Wyer 25 screen names are given the power to assign value to the videos they see. The intent of the video’s creator is interesting, but the swing of competency between the performer and the audience is what makes a parody successful.

The three parodies I did fieldwork on were created by woman who felt that their concerns were not being addressed elsewhere. Like Stendal, they did not see their opinion reflected anywhere and so they took it upon themselves to create it and put it up on YouTube. All three creators were concerned about sounding “preachy”, or making viewers feel as though they were being lectured. The use of popular songs assisted in diminishing this possible effect for Dunn and Shantini, while Stendal opted to just make a very short video. It is worth mentioning here that all three women are from different areas of the world, with Dunn in New Zealand, Stendal in

Oregon, and Shantini in British Columbia, Canada. Their videos have different levels of viewership, and their goals are slightly different concerning what it is they would like to convey to their audiences.

Despite the huge playground of the Internet, releasing a parody is more complicated than the physical ability to film and post something. The three women I interviewed had specific points they wanted to make, and chose parody as a framework for their messages. This likely has to do with parody’s position, both historically and today, as a socially sanctioned frame, a place where unofficial culture can resist dominant culture. There is still, of course, societal consequence and response in the negative but anonymous comments that are often left on videos.

But being able to say, “it is a parody”, frames the work in safety and protects it from outright social criticism. It puts the onus for tolerance on the viewer instead of the performer. Returning to Thompson, “Parody today continues to offer alternative strategies for making sense of the world and one’s place within it…the impulse to offend, to refuse to abide by commonly accepted Wyer 26 senses of good taste, remains a reliable way to find an audience” (Thompson 2011). While the issue of “good taste” is not the consideration here, the ability of unofficial culture to critique mainstream, dominant culture make parody a valuable tool for those on the periphery of societal normativity.

Wyer 27

Bibliography

Bauman, Richard. "Performance." In Folklore, Cultural Performances, and Popular Entertainment: A Communications-Centered Handbook, edited by Richard Bauman, 41-49. Oxford University Press, 1992.

Bayless, Martha. Parody in the Middle Ages: The Latin Tradition. The University of Michigan Press, 1996.

Burns, Lori, and Melisse Lafrance. Disruptive Divas: Feminism, Identity & Popular Music. New York: Routledge, 2002.

Coles, Tony. "Negotiating the Field of Masculinity: The Production and Reproduction of Multiple Dominant Masculinities." Men and Masculinities 12, no. 1 (2009): 30-44.

Dane, Joseph A. Parody: Critical Concepts Versus Literary Practices, Aristophanes to Sterne. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1988.

Dunn, Adelaide, interview by Sarah Wyer. Interview with Adelaide, Law Revue Girls (May 10, 2014).

Hutcheon, Linda. A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction. New York: Routledge, 1988.

—. A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-century Art Forms. University of Illinois Press, 2000.

Klaassen, Shantini, interview by Sarah Wyer. Interview with Shantini (May 23, 2014).

Konnikova, Maria. "The Six Things That Make Stories Go Viral Will Amaze, and Maybe Infuriate You." The New Yorker. January 21, 2014. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2014/01/the-six-things-that-make-stories-go- viral-will-amaze-and-maybe-infuriate-you.html.

Lim, Joon Soo, and Guy J. Golan. "Social Media Activism in Response to the Influence of Political Parody Videos on YouTube ." Communication Research (Sage Publications) 38, no. 710 (May 2011): 1-19.

Mack, Robert L. The Genius of Parody: Imitation and Originality in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century English Literature. New York: Palgrace Macmillan, 2007. Wyer 28

Murphy, Peter F. "Chapter 6: Insidious Humor and the Construction of Masculinity." In Studs, Tools, and the Family Tools: Metaphors Men Live By, by Peter F. Murphy, 119-134. Madison: Wisconsin University Press, 2001.

O'Hara, Daniel T. Radical Parody: American Culture and Critical Agency After Foucault. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992.

O'Neill, Megan. "What Makes a Video "Viral"?" Social Times: Your Social Media Source. May 9, 2011. http://socialtimes.com/what-makes-a-video-viral_b61409 (accessed May 2014).

Rose, Margaret A. Parody: ancient, modern, and post-modern. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Sawin, Patricia. "Performance at the Nexus of Gender, Power, and Desire: Reconsidering Bauman's Verbal Art from the Perspective of Gendered Subjectivity as Performance." Journal of American Folklore 115, no. 455 (2002): 28-61.

Stendal, Samantha, interview by Sarah Wyer. Interview with Sam (May 22, 2014).

Thompson, Ethan. Parody and Taste in Postwar American Television Culture. New York: Routledge, 2011.

Song Lyrics

"Blurred Lines" Must wanna get nasty (feat. T.I. & Pharrell Williams) Go ahead, get at me [Pharrell:] Everybody get up [Intro: Pharrell] Everybody get up [Verse 2: Robin Thicke] Everybody get up What do they make dreams for Hey, hey, hey When you got them jeans on Hey, hey, hey What do we need steam for Hey, hey, hey You the hottest bitch in this place I feel so lucky [Verse 1: Robin Thicke] Hey, hey, hey If you can't hear what I'm trying to say You wanna hug me If you can't read from the same page Hey, hey, hey Maybe I'm going deaf, What rhymes with hug me? Maybe I'm going blind Hey, hey, hey Maybe I'm out of my mind [Pharrell:] Everybody get up [Pre-chorus: Robin Thicke] OK now he was close, tried to domesticate [Pre-chorus: Robin Thicke] you OK now he was close, tried to domesticate But you're an animal, baby it's in your nature you Just let me liberate you But you're an animal, baby, it's in your Hey, hey, hey nature You don't need no papers Just let me liberate you Hey, hey, hey Hey, hey, hey That man is not your maker You don't need no papers Hey, hey, hey Hey, hey, hey That man is not your maker [Chorus: Robin Thicke] And that's why I'm gon' take a good girl [Chorus: Robin Thicke] I know you want it And that's why I'm gon' take a good girl I know you want it I know you want it I know you want it I know you want it You're a good girl I know you want it Can't let it get past me You're a good girl You're far from plastic Can't let it get past me Talk about getting blasted You're far from plastic [Pharrell:] Everybody get up Talk about getting blasted I hate these blurred lines I hate these blurred lines I know you want it I know you want it I hate them lines I know you want it I know you want it I know you want it I hate them lines But you're a good girl I know you want it The way you grab me But you're a good girl Wyer 30

The way you grab me I know you want it Must wanna get nasty I know you want it Go ahead, get at me You're a good girl Can't let it get past me [Verse 3: T.I.] You're far from plastic One thing I ask of you Talk about getting blasted Let me be the one you back that ass to I hate these blurred lines Go, from Malibu, to Paris, boo (Pharrell: Everybody get up) Yeah, I had a bitch, but she ain't bad as you I know you want it So hit me up when you pass through I know you want it I'll give you something big enough to tear I know you want it your ass in two But you're a good girl Swag on, even when you dress casual The way you grab me I mean it's almost unbearable Must wanna get nasty In a hundred years not dare, would I Go ahead, get at me Pull a Pharside let you pass me by Nothing like your last guy, he too square for [Outro: Pharrell] you Everybody get up He don't smack that ass and pull your hair Everybody get up like that Hey, hey, hey So I just watch and wait for you to salute Hey, hey, hey But you didn't pick Hey, hey, hey Not many women can refuse this pimpin' I'm a nice guy, but don't get it if you get with me “Defined Lines” Lyrics by Adelaide Dunn [Bridge: Robin Thicke] Shake the vibe, get down, get up Every bigot shut up (x 2) Do it like it hurt, like it hurt Hey hey hey (x 3) What you don't like work? Boy you'd better quit all your sexist ways [Pre-chorus: Robin Thicke] So hear our manifesto of the modern age. Baby can you breathe? I got this from It's time to undermine Jamaica The masculine confines It always works for me, Dakota to Decatur, Coz we don't wanna grind, uh huh Gri-ii-iind. No more pretending Hey, hey, hey You think that you're so slick, Cause now you winning Let me emasculate ya! Hey, hey, hey Because your precious dick Here's our beginning Can't beat my vibrator. We're feelin' the frustration [Chorus: Robin Thicke] From all the exploitation. I always wanted a good girl Prepare for your castration. (Pharrell: Everybody get up) I know you want it (Chorus) Wyer 31

So we can fuck this man's world, To make you a sandwich when we're on all With all its bullshit, fours. Girls don't deserve it. From history to herstory. We ain't good girls: Know you got some opinions that we don't We are scholastic, agree. Smart and sarcastic, Need to call my sister Joan of A-R-C, Not fucking plastic. Bake a feminist cake, Antoinette Marie. Listen mankind! Yeah, guys, we got spies, If you wanna get nasty, Know all you wanna do is fertilise, Just don't harass me: But avert your eyes from my thighs, You can't just grab me. Never tell a bitch that she gotta drop a size. That's a sex crime! You wanna box gap? Show me your six Yeah we don't want it - pack. It's chauvinistic. Wanna landing strip? You'd better get You're such a bigot! ripped. I apologise if you think my lines are crass, What you see on tv Tell me how it feels to get verbally harassed. Doesn't speak equality, It's straight up misogyny. (Chorus) Don't want you to come on my face! So we can fuck this man's world, With all its bullshit, You think you're hunky (hey hey hey) Girls don't deserve it. You wanna hug me (hey hey hey) We ain't good girls: Don't you mean fuck me? We are scholastic, Smart and sarcastic, One thing I ask of you: Not fucking plastic. Don't assume that we all just wanna screw. Listen mankind! Gotta respect me for me to be your boo. If you wanna get nasty, We don't want no scrubs, no we don't Just don't harass me: approve. You can't just grab me. Need a universal role reversal, That's a sex crime! In real life not a dress rehearsal. Yeah we don't want it - Gotta resist all the gender roles, It's chauvinistic. Time to put misogyny on parole, You're such a bigot! Put exploitation on probation, Time for you to witness our liberation! There's more to life than penetration, And sexual discrimination. “Let it Go Parody—Feminist Frozen” So tonight we ignite our civil rights, By Shantini Klaassen Resist chauvinism, Win the fight, In this world, a new age is dawning Coz you're livin large just like a montage Disney's on a quest Of you and your friends actin' out With a feminist algorithm Entourage. We passed the Bechdel Test But we ain't whores to do your household chores, Wyer 32

We put two women on the screen side by Let's twirl side With different hair to diversify Did you feel, did you feel Women finally understood It's just like Brave, but with some songs Did you feel, did you feel This film will right all of the wrongs The bonds of sisterhood Forget Snow White and Arielle Don't mention Belle A princess who is just like you If you're white Did you hear, did you hear Now the girls are in control The Princess and the Frog, Aladdin and Did you hear, did you hear Mulan We're reversing gender roles Once they came out we knew all racism was gone We don't need men to save us now And now that Frozen tells us women can be strong I've got new plans for Santino Fontana If I'm thin and beautiful anyhow I know I can belong

Idina's power ballad Did you see, Did you see Shows you don't need to conform Our box office homerun But if you want that freedom Did we even read You should sexily transform Hans Christian Andersen

For parents it's an easy sell A goldmine for womankind Doesn't everyone love Kristen Bell Watch it today and don't forget to buy it on A perfect film to give your girl bluray

Wyer 33

E-Mail Interview with Adelaide, Law Revue Girls

“Defined Lines” Parody of Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines

1. What was your motivation for creating this parody of “Blurred Lines”? We made the video for our law school's revue, which is a comedy skit show directed, written, performed etc by law students. It's actually gotten pretty popular and we wanted to go all out last year. Music video parodies are always a fixture (we perform on stage but these are projected onto a screen), and I'm a bit of a Weird Al, rapper and a huge feminist, so my friends Zoe and Olivia (the other two girls in the video) came to me and told me they had this idea for a parody and asked me to write it. We conceived of the video all together. Law Revue humour is always quite jock-ish/based on stereotypes/sexist/racist/risque and all that - so there's always really misogynistic jokes - so we wanted to kind of shock everyone by going hardcore feminist in a defiant, dominatrix, weirdly sexual kind of way.

2. Seeing “Blurred Lines” obviously sparked a desire to respond to its sexist message. How did you decide that a parody was the way to go? (As opposed to another method of critique.) Did the element of music have any impact on your choice? Zoe was the one who did some research into Blurred Lines / all the creepy stuff Robin Thicke was saying in interviews / the uncensored music video etc. I didn't realise there was a huge fuss over it but once I did a modicum of Internet exploration I also became quite enraged and got very excited about the parody (like a constructive sort of enraged). Like I said we chose a parody because it's law revue tradition - it's really effective to show people lyrics and a melody that they are well familiar with and a humourous video etc (I'm sure you can explain this phenomenon better than I). But I have a big passion for parody-writing in general and am always making them up in my head etc. So yeah the element of music was fundamental for the performance value etc and conveying some more progressive ideas without sounding too preachy.

3. Your video has been widely received and has been given both negative and positive reviews. Did you get the response from the anonymous public (YouTube viewers) Wyer 34 that you were expecting? Did the negative comments come as a surprise or were they expected? The negative comments were totally expected. You can find horrendously offensive comments in the most irrelevant youtube videos when people hide behind veils of anonymity - let alone a video with a strong feminist message. That's the other thing I was expecting - the whole backlash against the "angry feminists." When Olivia said she had uploaded it I actually cringed thinking about the trolling and made a point to never scroll past the video. But I didn't anticipate the range of issues that people picked out - a lot of people were offended that no people of colour were included in the video and claimed that we're white, privileged, middle class women who shouldn't be given a platform to speak about struggle. I'm a large supporter of intersectionality and totally understand why they were upset, but I think they thought the video was more of a professional project - really, it was made by a group of close friends and we never thought to fill any ethnicity quota. The three of us appeared in the video because it's law revue tradition to act in the scenes you've had a big part in creating, and the boys were chosen from the cast based on factors like being cool about prancing around in underwear on camera, pulling off said underwear with a typical sexualised/idealised athletic male body (to parallel the perfect/skinny/sexualised girls in Blurred Lines - but with variations :p), being our close friends, acting/comedy experience etc. Also, it kind of disturbed me that people watched it and all they saw was a bunch of privileged white people. They have no idea of our ethnicities - not to get overly technical but myself and one of the boys are mixed race and have some Polynesian blood - but New Zealand society is so multicultural that your culture and race isn't so much dictated by your physical appearance, but by how you choose to identify / assimilate into your culture(s). A lot of "white"-looking New Zealanders are hugely active within their indigenous communities, for example. And as for the wealthy privilege thing, I'd respond to them: yes we are lucky enough to be educated etc, so don't we have a duty to use that privilege/platform to speak out about social issues? "Privileged" people face other various discriminations, and I think everyone who desires should point out such discriminations whenever they can. Sorry I'm rambling. The positive responses (and sheer volume) of negative responses were not expected at all though - we thought the video might do the rounds in Auckland or NZ but we never thought it'd go global...

Wyer 35

Oh there was also a point during filming where I said to the others, "this definitely isn't a feminist video." There was the line about castration, shoving the vibrator into Chris's mouth, etc. But we didn't stress about it, because it was meant to be risque, funny and not taken too seriously by the (typically loud, drunk) audience. Of course if we knew it was going to go viral we wouldn't have included the more offensive elements, but then again if we had done that it probably wouldn't have gone viral in the first place.

4. Do you think that having access to the Internet makes it easier for marginalized groups to respond to mainstream messages? Yes, definitely! My social media networks are hotbeds of Internet activism. With access to the Internet becoming more widespread the web becomes more of a global community which allows for so many more voices - less and less we garner ideas about marginalised groups from (unintentionally) biased media coming out of mainly the USA and the UK. But on the flipside, the Internet provides yet another breeding ground for hate, and confusion… Suddenly everyone has an avenue with which to express their opinions to the whole world, and it was baffling seeing the variety of responses to the video.

5. Do you feel that your parody was a success? Did it accomplish what you hoped it would? The video was a huge success for many reasons. We learned about what it means to be feminists, activists and even (as cringey as it sounds) celebrities. We put our law school and country on the map. But most rewardingly, we alerted a lot of people to the engrained, subconscious, unseen and uncriticised misogyny in pop culture (and specifically, Blurred Lines). And we made some people laugh! Which is awesome.

Wyer 36

E-Mail Interview with Shantini

“Let it Go” from Frozen Parody

1. What was your motivation for creating this parody of Frozen? I took three of my nephews to see Frozen in the theatre. I liked the movie, but it left a bit of a weird taste in my mouth. I felt uncomfortable with how the media and public were calling it a feminist movie and lauding the creators as heroes, when I felt there were some problems with the message and the portrayal of women. In addition, my facebook friends (lots of actors and musical theatre/disney fans) seemed to be singing its praises as well. While there was some written criticism of the film, nobody seemed to be speaking to the specific concerns I had - I didn't feel represented in the response I saw.

2. Seeing Frozen obviously sparked a desire to respond to its message. How did you decide that a parody was the way to go? (As opposed to another method of critique.) Did the element of music have any impact on your choice? The most obvious reason is that I'm a singer and an actor, so this is a natural avenue for me. Writing silly rhymes has always come pretty easily to me. At the same time, I didn't want to be to heavy-handed with my critique. I do appreciate that Disney is taking steps forward in its portrayal of minorities, so I didn't want to come down on them too hard by ranting in a blog post. What I did want was to make people laugh a bit and think a bit. I also think that feminist critique gets a really bad rap, to the point that many women don't even want to call themselves feminists any more because of the negative connotations of the word; bitchy, man-hating, irrational. A lot of folks (including some who responded to my video, and mostly white men) write off anything feminist because it's uncomfortable to recognize privilege. In other words, sadly, feminists need to tread lightly if they want to be taken seriously by people outside of their community. I felt like presenting this idea in a silly and entertaining way would be more effective to get the message across than other platforms.

3. Your video has more than 2000 views! Did you get the response from the anonymous public (YouTube viewers) that you were expecting? Wyer 37

I had hoped for a bit more - I haven't done a lot of analysing numbers, but I hoped I might get to around 10,000. I sent it to almost every editor of feminist media that I could find (mostly from Bitch Media and Jezebel, and a couple from Upworthy) but I didn't get much of a response. One of the problems I ran into was that when all videos are uploaded, they're scanned for copyrighted content and flagged. This meant that my video couldn't be viewed on any mobile devices, which I think is a big reason I took a hit. Other than that, I didn't invest anything in the video, and it was mostly for fun. As far as commented response, it was generally really positive. This is the first online work I've done that's been a bit more widely circulated (not just friends and friends of friends) so I did get some nasty/trolly comments. I was surprised at how much it affected me. I'm an actor, so I'm used to criticism and rejection, but there's something awful about creating something and putting a piece of yourself online and then having someone on their couch click 'dislike' and write 'this gave me cancer'. It's just weird and really jarring, but I got used to it. Besides that, I got a lot of love and a lot of shares, and overall it was a really positive experience.

4. Do you think that having access to the Internet makes it easier for marginalized groups to respond to mainstream messages? Absolutely, yes. The downside is the Internet gives everyone an equal voice, including people with prejudice and hate that they're desperate to spread around. With the sheer volume, I think it's really hard for marginalized voices to stand out, and for intelligent argument to be considered. Too often it gets lost in the big headlines and the paid ads. I am grateful that I have the freedom and opportunity to share my point of view via youtube and blogging and twitter, and I have truly found that there is a community of like-minded people that I can learn from. However, it's really difficult to find the quality amongst the quantity unless you're searching for it.

5. Do you feel that your parody was a success? Did it accomplish what you hoped it would? I do. For me, the main purpose was to share my feelings about the film and have fun doing it, which was definitely accomplished. I think there's a sweet spot on sharing your opinion about something - one end is the knee-jerk reaction where you try to tear something down and Wyer 38 alienate people, and the other end is just letting it fade into the back of your mind and not ever speaking up. Somewhere in the middle is realizing that maybe you have something important to say, or maybe you have a unique point of view, and thinking through how you can share it that will actually make people listen instead of immediately turning them off. I felt proud that I landed somewhere in there, and I hope in the future I can develop that skill further.

Wyer 39

Notes from Recorded Interview with Samantha Stendal

“I was not expecting as big of a reaction. I was expecting very minimal critique. We were really surprised that people could take it negatively, or could call it controversial, or call it a bad thing.

I think that anonymity has a huge, huge, huge impact. If it was on someone’s Facebook there would be a much nicer conversation. You can tell when someone honestly believes that women deserve rape. That’s why YouTube comments are known as the worst comments. You can just click out, or sign out. You don’t have to listen to the people that are fighting against you. The message I wanted to send out is that, really, we should be treating everyone with respect. Plain and simple, that’s all I wanted, and really to stress how we look at people, and to stress these situations, and how we choose to act, because it has become a standard that you get someone drunk so that you can have sex with them and don’t call that rape. We are taught in middle school and high school that rape is something that happens in a back alley with a stranger. We don’t have a good conversation about consent and what consent looks like, and that being passed out is not consenting. With the video, succinctly, I just wanted to show that being passed out does not mean it is okay. We have this platform, with social media, to actually express our thoughts and get our point across, and that’s why I’m so thankful that we live in an age where I can pick up a camera, shoot something, and put it online for millions of people to see. We are starting to change how we look at our online media. I’m very happy that it took off, but it’s more important for me that I got to have a say in that conversation. I think it was a success at least in getting people to talk about it. What I wanted to do was start a conversation that stopped looking at victim blaming, and started looking at how we should treat women better, and that did happen. So that, to me, was my success. All I wanted was to put my opinion up there because I Wyer 40 was so ticked off that I didn’t already see it online. After going down the feminist trail a year after posting that video, I would critique my video so much. I’ll put it up because I haven’t seen it. “ Wyer 41

“Defined Lines” YouTube Comment Conversation

The below conversation took place in the comment section of The Law Revue Girls’

“Defined Lines” parody on YouTube. The screen names have been changed to protect anonymity, except for my own (Sarah W). I participated in this conversation to gauge the reaction to not only the parody, but to a “breaking of the rules” of YouTube comments, namely that of actually posting sources for my arguments. I mainly addressed the two largest posters,

Izzy and JOEN4. JOEN4 started the comment thread. I discovered that JOEN4 would answer my comments at first, but the more sources I posted the more he ignored my comments, even when they tagged him. Stream

JOEN4 4 days ago

Thicke's song is about enticing a married woman into adultery as anyone who reads the lyrics should be able to ascertain. Your video, on the other hand, is truly degrading and says more about you than the original song. Reply · 15

Hide replies

JBS 3 days ago

Couldn't agree more, I feel like everybody has blown this song out of proportion Reply · 7

Nelson 3 days ago

I can't stop laughing please shove your fedora up your ass. Reply · 16

Wyer 42

JOEN4 3 days ago

Huh? Reply ·

JOEN4 2 days ago

If by "this" song you mean "Defined Lines," yes- I do. But it comes from an erroneous understanding of the Blurred Lines song. Pharrell Williams already explained on NPR that the song is about a passive man that's excited because a woman is coming onto HIM. Reply · 2

Nelson 2 days ago

Anything to cover up their rape culture and misogyny huh :) Reply · 10

Moop 2 days ago

+Nelson Rape culture? No where in this song does it reference prison life. Nor is there any hint of misogyny in JOEN4's comments. Reply · 2

JOEN4 2 days ago

Its sad that people like +Nelson are so heavily indoctrinated that they believe this malarkey. Reply · 4

JBS 2 days ago

Wyer 43

+JOEN4 I think people blew the original song out of proportion. I don't see any rape references. Its just a dude trying to get laid and a woman can't decide if she is going through with it. This "Defined Lines" video is just hypocritical horseshit. And I have no idea what Nelson is trying to say. Reply · 4

Izzy 2 days ago

+JBS If a woman is unsure, then he should back off. Unless she is absolutely saying yes, of her own, sober volition, it's rape. And just because you didn't hear any rape references doesn't mean they weren't there. Phrases like "I know you want it" are quite problematic, and HAVE been used by actual rapists in the past, along with other phrases in the song. Show less Reply · 9

JBS 2 days ago

Wow talk about trying to turn a molehill into a mountain. Reply · 2

Izzy 2 days ago

+JBS Damn right I am. Rape is a serious topic, and deserves to be treated with absolute gravity. To do any less is to insult the millions of people who have been victims of it. Reply · 12

JBS 2 days ago

"I know you want it." obviously means she wants to have sex but doesn't want to cheat. She is hesitant to commit adultery and Thicke is trying to convince to go through with it. Nothing about rape at all. And fyi, the molehill saying means turning a small issue into a huge conflict. He sings about adultery, you cry about rape culture. You make me sick. Reply · 5

Wyer 44

Izzy 2 days ago (edited)

+JBS He shouldn't be trying to convince her. It is HER decision to make. Coercive sex is two tiny steps away from rape, my friend. If someone says they aren't sure, or that they don't want it, or that they've changed their mind, then don't press the issue. It might not necessarily make you a rapist, but it sure makes you an asshole. Men cannot know what is going on inside a woman's head (or anyone's for that matter), so to project their own desires onto her, and to presume that she wants him simply because he wants her, is how rapists are born. I'm well aware of what turning a molehill into a mountain means. In my opinion, the mountain is not nearly big enough to properly reflect this issue. People like you keep shrugging it off and sweeping it under the rug, and frankly, it makes me sick. Show less Reply · 9

Moop 2 days ago

+Izzy "And just because you didn't hear any rape references doesn't mean they weren't there." Then where is this decoder ring I need to see the hidden messages? Because telling me it's there and it actually being there are two separate things. I have to see it to believe it. I need evidence. It's problematic when people place specific crimes on pedestals but never actually doing anything to solve the problem. It shows the idea that you are willing to "talk the talk but not walk the walk". Rape is bad, but it's not the worst. A murderer is worse than a rapist, don't you think? To assume, generalize, police, and control what men say isn't right either. Even when he is attracted to someone, woman or man. He has the right to propose his idea or plan to him or her and it is ultimately up to the other person to accept. Just like you said, "HER decision to make". Once someone rejects the notion of sex then fine, he will move on. "Men cannot know what is going on inside a woman's head" Yes we can. It's called communication. "Hey, what's on your mind?" Ever heard of that? It would be nice if you could respond to a question and not be an asshole(bitch). Also, if you truly believe that men have no clue what's going on in a woman's head, what makes you think you know what's going on in his head? " so to project their own desires onto her, and to presume that she wants him simply because he wants her, is how rapists are born." You don't know how the mind of a rapist is, do you? Most rapists don't really care what their victims think and it's most proven that the rapist seeks power over the victim. JBS isn't shrugging or sweeping the sensitive crime of rape under the rug, you're overreacting to a song that has been grossly misinterpreted. Show less Reply · 3

Izzy 2 days ago

No decoder ring required. The phrases used in Blurred Lines are straight up taken from the mouths of rapists. There have been several videos and photosets floating around out there, with Blurred Lines' clips juxtaposed against rape survivors holding signs with what their rapists said to them, and the dialogue matches up in scary ways. I would argue that rape is worse than murder, honestly. In murder, the victim is gone, but in rape they are forever Wyer 45

changed, and have to live with what happened to them for the rest of their lives. Some can move on from it, but some suffer until the end of their days. As far as the mind of rapists go, have you seen the recent stats that show how most rapists (especially those guilty of date rape) don't see themselves as rapists, but merely as regular everyday men? Ones who feel that because they paid for the date, the woman somehow "owes them", or ones that have sex with women who are passed out drunk, or ones that refuse to listen when she says she changed her mind. Not every rapist out there is lurking in the shadows waiting to pounce. In fact, it's far more common for the abuser to be someone the victim knows, who coerces them into the act. Show less Reply · 8

JOEN4 2 days ago

Just because similar phrases are heard from rapists does not mean that's what the song is about. Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: correlation does not equal causation.

And I've written extensively on my blog about the bogus rape stats that feminists use- intimate partner violence has actually been on a steep decline in this country for the last 15 or so years and no woman has a "1 in 4" chance of being raped- that is complete malarkey.

We have a thing called prison to deal with those boys you describe. Show less Reply · 2

Izzy 2 days ago

+JOEN4 Prison, huh? Yeah, because every rapist goes to prison. Obviously. And every person who's ever been raped has, of course, reported the incident and not been shamed or humiliated afterwards.

Hell, do you even know how many rapes go unreported? How many women there are out there who don't even realize when they've been raped? How many men, even? How many people there are who think archaic notions like 'I can't rape her, she's my wife, the consent was already given with our vows', are perfectly acceptable as a defense?

Correlation may not equal causation, but videos like Blurred lines are only furthering the idea that it's okay to tell a woman what she wants, that it's okay to coerce her, and that's a problem. A big one. Show less Reply · 8

JOEN4 1 day ago

Okay:

1. No, I don't know how many rapes go unreported because its impossible to know how many rapes go unreported. Wyer 46

2. Not every rapist goes to prison, but the point is that it is illegal and there is a very severe penalty for the act when it is successfully prosecuted. This means that we do not live in a "rape culture." Go read one of the Gor novels (which I despise, btw) if you want to see what a "rape culture" would actually look like.

3. If you admit that correlation doesn't equal causation then you also realize that the similarity of the lyrics to certain undesirable ideas does not indicate a causation fo the furthering of those ideas.

4. There is absolutely nothing in the song that suggests he is telling her what she wants or is seducing her. Here's a real shocker for you: he might be RIGHT when he says he knows she wants it. She might well want it and he's just reflecting that. After all, isn't knowing that your partner is willing a big part of CONSENT?

5. Not one statement you have typed in this conversation has prevented anyone from being raped. Show less Reply · 5

Izzy 1 day ago

1. Just based on information from medical sources, there is a large number of people who seek medical treatment after a rape, but do not file charges with the police for whatever reason. From those we CAN tell at least a fraction of the rapes that are unreported, but yes, we cannot know them all, because many do not seek medical attention, either. Recent stats indicate the number of unreported ones to be as high as 60%. 2. A lot of things are illegal, but people still get away with it. From what I can find from various law enforcement statistics, only about 3% of rapists serve any time. Three percent. Hardly a deterrent for would-be rapists. And it does matter that that number is so low. Girls at my university's sociology society took a poll of men across our campus, and over 90% said that they would coerce or force a woman sexually, if they knew they would get away with it. If you don't find that disturbing, then something is wrong with you. 3. No, I do not agree. Thicke's song has a permissive attitude about sexual coercion, about male power over women, and it, along with other sources like it, WILL normalize the idea of rape and only add to a generation of men who think it's 'not a big deal'. 4. The song is still dominating in its nature, calling the subject 'bitch' and telling her to 'do it like it hurt'. Even if it's not rapey in its lyrics (which it is), it's at the very least sexually dominating, trying to force women back into a subservient role when we've worked so hard to gain equality already. 5. And I cannot definitively say that your statements have caused someone to get raped, but attitudes like yours are the reason so many men seem to be alright with rape and sexual coercion. When rapists see that the men around them are making jokes about rape, or are shrugging it off like it's no big deal, then it normalizes the act for them, and they end up not seeing anything wrong with themselves. Show less Reply · 4

Kho 1 day ago

+Nelson Its just a fucking song. Reply · 1

Wyer 47

Izzy 1 day ago

It isn't JUST a song, it's a statement. It's a reflection of our society, the way that people reacted to Blurred Lines (or rather did not react) and yet reacted so violently to this parody. Reply · 3

JOEN4 1 day ago

Actually the information you're referring to, +Izzy, is derived from the bogus Mary Koss Ms. Magazine study that's designed to inflate the numbers. Essentially, the survey decides that women were raped based on criteria that go above and beyond whether or not the women consider themselves victims of rape. The most recent statistics- which Obama quoted- actually include survey questions that qualify a woman as a victim of rape if the guy had to convince to have sex in any way shape or form. For further information: Sexual assault in America: Do we know the true numbers?

That's Christina Hoff Sommers. I would also recommend you read her book "Who Stole Feminism?" You've been lied to.

The actual conviction rate for rape is around 50%, which is the same as most violent crimes.

As to it being just a song, it contains this lyric: Ok, now he was close Tried to domesticate you But you're an animal Baby, it's in your nature Just let me liberate you You don't need no papers That man is not your maker

How do you read that lyric and not come away understanding that the song is about wanting to have a sexually satisfying relationship with a woman because she's involved with this oppressive relationship with a loser guy?

The original song is one that you interpreted to have the meaning you think it does and your staunch indoctrination will not allow you to think otherwise. This song, however, was written with the express purpose of being hateful and degrading. Show less Reply · 2

Izzy 1 day ago

I don't know about you, but I don't like someone presuming to know what is in my nature, and I don't like it being implied that I'm an animal. Animals can't give consent. You may not see it this way, but this song has given me heebie-jeebies ever since the first time I heard it, before I even knew about the feminist uproar surrounding it. When a song gives a person that kind of visceral reaction, something has to be wrong with it. Not a single song in my entire life has ever invoked that kind of reaction. Wyer 48

And yes, this song was written with the express purpose of being degrading, to illustrate how the women in Blurred Lines were seen and treated. They're not saying "Hey, here's how men should be treated," they're saying, "Hey, men! Here is how you have been treating us!" Show less Reply · 3

JOEN4 1 day ago

Who said it was a presumption? This could easily be someone he knows. And you are an animal, like it or not. A visceral reaction is not a guarantee that there's something wrong with it- a lot of right wing christians had a visceral reaction to Marilyn Manson, but there's nothing wrong with what he does.

And no- the women in the blurred lines video are not being treated in the manner that the men are in this video. Show less Reply ·

Izzy 1 day ago

They are both being reduced to nothing but sexual objects. They are treated EXACTLY the same. Reply · 1

JOEN4 1 day ago

Wrong- the girls are having a good time and flirting in Thicke's video while the guys in this are being actively humiliated. Reducing someone to a sex object is not, as your feminists teachers would say, something that is inherently degrading nor is it some grand show of disrespect. This video, on the other hand, refers to physically mutilating men and forcing them to perform subservient acts. Big, big difference that your confirmation bias will not allow you to see. Read more Reply · 1

JOEN4 1 day ago

+Izzy Also, nobody in the song refers to YOU as an animal. One thing feminists need to get past is this bizarre notion that something said about A woman applies to ALL women. Reply · Wyer 49

1

Izzy 1 day ago

Why do people always take things so literally? The castration is metaphorical. They're not hacking off genitalia - they're stripping men of their power - implying that men's power comes entirely from the genitals, which reduces them to nothing more than a sex object (and I don't know about you, but if I was being told that I exist only for sex and that my own thoughts and opinions don't matter, I would consider that rather disrespectful and degrading). The girls in Thicke's video have the most bored expressions on their faces I've ever seen. They clearly are not loving being there, and the few times they are smiling at all, you can tell that the smiles are completely put on. See, the reason the men appear to be treated so badly in this video is because they have so much further to fall. In our society, men have the power. Women are already stripped bare, and treated as little more than tits with legs, so to see them treated like that by Thicke isn't shocking, when really it's just as bad as how the men are treated here. Show less Reply · 2

JOEN4 23 hours ago

If you expect castration to not be taken literally, then you better be ready accept "blurred lines" in the figurative as well. Sorry kiddo- if Thicke's song has to be taken literally (and literally in your interpretation at that) then this song has to be taken literally as well.

Open and shut. Read more Reply ·

Izzy 16 hours ago

The issue is that figurative castration puts no one in danger, but figurative rape still does. Reply ·

Brown 16 hours ago

+Izzy if she's not sure, then its not rape. it doesn't become rape until the words no or stop are involved. Reply ·

Wyer 50

Brown 16 hours ago (edited)

+JOEN4 so what is it when women reduce themselves to sexual objects? i guess thats men's fault, too? Reply ·

andrewszombie 15 hours ago

+Moop "You're the hottest bitch in this place" That sounds very sexist to me Reply · 2

Izzy 10 hours ago

What if she's drunk, Charlie? What if she's drugged? What if she's asleep? In those instances, she cannot give consent, she cannot even say No or Stop, and that makes it rape. While it may not hold up in court as legal rape, unless she wants it (or he, because guys can get raped too), then it counts as rape. Reply · 2

Brown 10 hours ago

+Izzy so what if she's drunk? just because a woman is drunk and has sex doesn't mean she's raped. you're stupid. then you say men can be raped. who is charged with rape if they are both raped, dumbfuck? Reply ·

Izzy 10 hours ago

Depending on how drunk she is, she may not be fully conscious of her actions, just like if she is drugged, or asleep, so to engage in sexual activity with her counts as rape. And yes, men can be raped as well. But it is impossible for both parties to be raped. One is the rapist, and one is the victim, but if they are both drunk then it can be difficult to press charges, because neither may necessarily remember the actions they took the night of the assault, so it's nigh impossible to prove or even know which one was the initiator, in instances like that. Show less Reply · 1

Wyer 51

Brown 10 hours ago

+Izzy keep adding, twisting your nonsense to make yourself not seem insane. it's not going to change the fact that you are nuts. Reply · 1

Izzy 10 hours ago

In what way am I insane? Please explain. Reply ·

Brown 10 hours ago

+Izzy by claiming being drunk while having sex is grounds for rape prosecutions. Reply ·

Izzy 10 hours ago

It can be. Have you never heard of blacking out? Or passing out while drunk? I'm not talking about people who get drunk, have consensual sex and simply regret it in the morning; I'm talking about people who get so drunk that they find themselves in a vulnerable state, and someone takes advantage of that. That is rape, and people have been prosecuted and convicted for taking someone against their will when that person is drunk. Show less Reply ·

Brown 9 hours ago

+Izzy like i previously said, you're just trying to add shit to what you previously said so that you don't sound nuts. it's not working. earlier you said you can't consent to sex while drunk, now you are twisting saying you can consent to sex while drunk. you're just stupid. leave me alone now. this is a copy paste of your words..What if she's drunk, Charlie? What if she's drugged? What if she's asleep? In those instances, she cannot give consent. Read more Reply ·

Wyer 52

JOEN4 7 hours ago

"Figurative castration puts no one in danger but figurative rape still does." No, it doesn't. Figurative rape (or rather rape you've inferred incorrectly from this song) does not convert a sensitive lover into a malign thug. Sorry, lady, but yours is not some magically privileged position- either both are literal or neither are literal.

I'm going to do my best to let everyone else on this thread deal with you- this is absurd. Read more Reply ·

Vid 6 hours ago

Yeah, so you think that whatever famous people said on magazines or on TV are true?? They're rich, they're famous but they're not honest and their life ain't effective. In fact, lots of them are just big liar and do whatever to get more fans, like you Reply ·

JOEN4 6 hours ago

No, I don't think whatever famous people say is true- but when I see lyrics that don't talk about rape and one of the writers explains that they don't indicate rape, I tend to agree that the song doesn't indicate rape. Reply · 1

Vid 6 hours ago

Actually, I watched the unrated Blurred lines coz Emily. To be honest I love the naked girls and sometimes I behave like in that video too, but as the social guys I think it shouldn't be so popular Reply ·

Izzy 2 hours ago (edited)

So because the person who wrote it said there wasn't rape in it, that means there isn't? Right. And Monica Lewinsky was just tying Bill Clinton's shoes... Reply · Wyer 53

Sarah W 2 hours ago

+Izzy I'm really happy that you are standing up for women here. Your replies have been uplifting to read. Thank you. Charlie, if consent is not given then it is rape. It does not matter what condition the woman (or man) is in. No consent = rape. If the person is unable to give consent, then it is rape. Sexual Offences Act 1956:

"Lack of consent may be demonstrated by:

The complainant's assertion of force or threats; Evidence that by reason of drink, drugs, sleep, age or mental disability the complainant was unaware of what was occurring and/ or incapable of giving valid consent; or Evidence that the complainant was deceived as to the identity of the person with whom (s)he had intercourse."

That is a Law, you know. With a capital L and everything.

Also Thicke's video is absolutely perpetuating rape culture. Look at it. The women are naked (in the nonrated version). There is one scene where he blows cigarette smoke in her face. How liberating. The only time the women speak is when one says "meow." They have no voices and no clothes (while the men are fully clothed, you might notice). The purpose of this video is to reverse the roles and show people how abnormal it seems to watch nearly naked men cast in submissive roles, which is something that happens regularly with women. Show less Reply ·

JOEN4 2 hours ago

None of those things indicate rape culture because there's no such thing as rape culture (outside of, say, the Taliban.)

And you can keep bleating out the party line about how this video is about reversing the roles, but its not: you have it in your head- in some imaginary la la land that is not reflected anywhere in the reality of this video or the song- that the song is about rape simply because its about sex. Yes- the men are fully clothed. Yes- the women are naked. Yes- its all highly, highly sexual. But guess what: other people are free to do as they please in this world and they are not required to justify everything they do as "liberating" by your standards. Too bad if you don't like that.

You live in a free country (assuming you're here in the US) and that means that other people get to express ideas and opinions that you may not like and the fact that such expressions exist does not mean you're being oppressed.

Somehow you've convinced yourselves that anything you determine to be a part of "rape culture" is immediately to be shunned and castigated. That sense of entitlement comes from the (patriarchal) era of chivalry, when a woman's sense of refinement and good graces determined how everybody expressed themselves. You wanted equality and you got it- that means that Thicke and his boys get to do their thing and you get to sit there and not like it.

What's going on in the blurred lines video is my idea of a good time and because its my idea of a GOOD time, I would only want to do it with willing participants because I am not a malign thug who delights in cruelty to the innocent (unlike the harpies in this video) and would not inflict myself on the uninterested.

Wyer 54

If the above paragraph fills you with horror, dread and disgust, then you are a shimmering embodiment of the old saying that puritanism is the "sinking feeling that somebody somewhere is having a good time."

And nobody in this thread has "stood up" for women. Standing up for women is taking an assault rifle and mowing down the terrorists that kidnap and enslave women for trying to get an education, not getting into catty little arguments on the Internet. Show less Reply · 1

Izzy 2 hours ago

You want to talk about terrorism? Okay, how about we talk about how many women are terrified to walk down a street at night alone, not for fear of being robbed or murdered, but of being raped. How many women take self- defense classes and walk with their keys in their hands like a weapon, simply because if you don't physically fight back and scream for your life, then there is the fear that no one will believe what happened to you. They will ask you what you were wearing, or what you were doing that incited him to do it, but how often is the rapist asked why he did it? No, it all comes down to why the victim didn't do more to stop their attacker. And that is terrifying.

Not every terrorist wears a turban. Read more Reply ·

Sarah W 2 hours ago (edited)

We do not have equality. And there are many ways of standing up for women. Oppression and "standing up for women" are not so narrowly defined. Standing up for someone does not (usually, I venture to say) require an assault rifle. If my argument is catty then I am surprised you deigned to reply to it. In fact I am surprised you have been commenting so prolifically!

If you do not think there is a rape culture in the US (where I do live, thank you) then maybe you should take a look at the movement currently occurring in college campuses around the country. Perhaps you should check out the Steubenville case from last year. The US has a rape culture. Here is a lovely article from TIME magazine for you: http://time.com/40110/rape-culture-is-real/

Need a more reputable source? I'm happy to direct you to some more.

Also your comment does not fill me with any of those emotions. I am aware that the hegemonic system within which we live is patriarchal in nature and biased especially towards white men. I believe that you are misunderstanding the problem with Blurred Lines, as well as placing value judgments on the girls who created this video when you likely do not know their backgrounds or motives. The problem is not whether Blurred Lines intended to send a message about rape culture. The problem is that Blurred Lines is being interpreted as a perpetuation of rape culture and sexism against women, and as thus it is sending the (intentional or unintentional) message that treating women as sexual objects is normal, natural, okay. I do not think the video is about rape because it is about sex. Sex and rape are wildly different things. Again, coercion is not consent. Many women find sex liberating, which is great.

Your assertion that rape culture is not a problem in the US tells me that you do not know what rape culture is. I Wyer 55

really do politely suggest that you take a look at that article. I really am happy to find more for you. The denial that we live in a rape culture is more damaging than Blurred Lines' music video. Show less Reply ·

Brown 1 hour ago

+Izzy anyone that walks down streets at night should be carrying a weapon. a .38 special is a nice threat neutralizer.

people who carry don't have to worry. Reply ·

Sarah W 1 hour ago (edited)

Here are some links that might be helpful: http://www.upworthy.com/rape-culture-is-alive-and-well-in-america-because-of-these-6-things http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-we-need-to-keep-talking-about-rape-culture/2014/03/28/58acfec4- b5bf-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/03/examples-of-rape-culture/ http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/feb/14/rape-culture-damage-it-does-everyday-sexism http://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2013/03/steubenville-rape-cultures-abu-ghraib-moment http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2013/03/17/lesson-from-steubenville-rape-trial-how-jock-culture-morphs- into-rape-culture/

I'll find some more academic, peer-reviewed articles too if that might be helpful as well.

Here is a great TED talk as well that addresses how violence against women is also a men's issue: http://www.ted.com/talks/jackson_katz_violence_against_women_it_s_a_men_s_issue Show less Reply ·

Izzy 1 hour ago

Yeah, except in most countries, it's illegal to walk around with firearms. Reply · 1 Wyer 56

JOEN4 1 hour ago

-You being terrified to walk down the street doesn't mean you're being terrorized. People in realityland are concerned about justice as it relates to what people do to one another. People in fantasyland are concerned about justice as it relates to their precious little feelings.

-Your fear of being raped while walking down the street is unfounded as very few rapes occur in that manner.

-We live in a country where we have a thing called "due process before the bar of law," which means that even that assailant gets his day in court. It is entirely possible that the complainant identified the wrong person or is running some kind of scam or is the one who actually started the altercation and is trying to spin it in their favor. All of that has to be determined in a free society. And for the record this is coming from someone who has 1. taken an actual real life stalker to court and sat there while the defense got the sick creep sprung on a technicality and 2. someone who has on two separate occasions called the police after seeing men beating women on the street. (The most recent of those two incidents involved a man that broke free of about five people trying to hold him back, ran a full block, and punched a woman in the face) and 3. stood his ground in the school yard in the face of bullies that were tough enough to beat up girls but too chickenshit to dance with someone their own size.

-Men (myself included) take self defense classes for the same reason. The idea that men are less concerned for their safety because they're a foot taller than women is bogus. I am 6'2'' and fairly muscular. The only thing that means is that people are less likely to pick a bare-knuckle fist fight with me. But I'm just as vulnerable to a knife or a bullet as anyone else and there's few things that put me on my guard like walking alone down a street at night and hearing some threatening, taunting voice out of nowhere shout "hey big man!"

-And being a "big man," I've also been subject to the bogus accusations of a lot of weaklings who didn't have the guts to talk to me face-to-face, so I'm naturally one to put on the breaks when I hear this sort of "I'm weak therefore you should be locked up and throw away the key" attitude.

-So called privilege is a pendulum that swings both ways. For example, if you want to approach a guy and ask him out for a date, you don't have to think "okay, is the way I'm dressed or the tone of my voice or the context of the moment going to make him think I'm a stalker or a bully?" You've probably never walked into a room and been asked to leave simply because your very physical appearance makes people uncomfortable.

-And most of all, stop and consider that a lot of people who would refrain from punching you or punching you hard because you're weaker will punch me as hard as they can. And if that person is physically smaller than me, my only recourse is to get away because I'll take the blame regardless.

The grass, as they so rightly say, is always greener in someone else's yard. Show less Reply ·

Sarah W 1 hour ago

If I were to approach a guy and ask him out on a date, I might ask myself "okay, is the way I'm dressed or the tone of my voice or the context of the moment going to make him think that I am a slut or a stalker?" That happens to women too, you know. I have been with friends who have been asked to leave a place because their physical appearance has made people "too distracted" or "uncomfortable." I am sorry that Wyer 57

has happened to you.

So you are arguing that women are not punched as hard because they are assumed to be weaker? I don't understand the point you are trying to make. That more women should be punched? Should women not be scared to walk alone at night? Women have been repeatedly assaulted on and near the college in my city at night when walking alone. I have seen several police reports warning the community about such things. So it can, indeed, happen.

I am very happy to read that you have stood up for women in the past. What I do not understand is why you have stopped. Show less

Nelson

Yesterday 10:56 AM

+Izzy god bless you for making intelligent replies to probably the most stupidest and close minded bigots on the Internet.

JOEN4

Yesterday 11:12 AM

Claims of bigotry are very serious and often an affront to people if they're leveled erroneously. The people who gave their lives to fight for civil rights and actual injustice and give the term "bigot" its sting deserve better than to have that word and all it implies used as shaming language for people you disagree with.

And I defy you to find one bigoted statement among anything I've said here.

Show less

Brown

Yesterday 11:12 AM

+Nelson the bigots are the ones that attack all men as rapists.

JOEN4

Yesterday 11:12 AM

+Brown damn right. Wyer 58

Jess

Yesterday 11:34 AM

+Izzy Keep standing strong.

JOEN4

Yesterday 11:36 AM

Yes- because posting your opinion on the Internet is such an act of profound courage.

Izzy

Yesterday 1:17 PM

I never said all men are rapists. Hell, not even all rapists are men. But for women, all men out there for us have the potential to be a rapist, and so we're taught from a very young age to fear all of them. It's honestly probably this mindset that's led to lack of reporting in certain cases, because so many women out there believe that if you weren't jumped in an alley and pinned down or something that it didn't count as rape.

Show less

Brown

Yesterday 1:40 PM

+Izzy your parents are awful to teach you that all men are potential rapists. for your children's sake, i hope you stop that vicious cycle of bigotry.

Izzy

Yesterday 1:50 PM

My parents were not the only ones to teach me that. My teachers, law enforcement officials, older friends, sunday school teachers - nearly everyone. Of course none of them ever said "every man is out to rape you", but they did tell me not to go out at night because I could be attacked, or to not wear skimpy clothing because it might incite men to violence, etc. etc. This kind of lesson is taught to every girl in our Wyer 59

society, because keeping them afraid keeps them safer than if they taught them to trust everyone unconditionally.

Show less

Brown

Yesterday 2:01 PM

+Izzy please stop your family's cycle of bigotry against men.

Sarah W

Yesterday 2:13 PM

+Brown Please read some of the sources I have posted in above comments on rape culture.

Sarah W

Yesterday 2:18 PM http://www.leftycartoons.com/wp-content/uploads/men1.png

Izzy

Yesterday 2:23 PM

What do you tell children when they are young, to keep them safe? Don't go with strangers, don't take candy from strangers, etc. From a very young age, we are taught to avoid the unknown, and that everyone out there can potentially hurt us. As we grow, women are taught to fear men, in particular, because they still have the potential to hurt us. If you want the 'bigotry' to stop against men, then men need to stop giving us reasons to fear them.

Show less

SexPig

Yesterday 2:23 PM Wyer 60

+Izzy Some people have told me that the people who have drunk sex while at parties are not raping each other JUST BECAUSE WE SAY SO. LMAO. LOLOL. ROTFL. Well of course that JUST BECAUSE WE SAY SO, it is rape. Duuh. Even when they are both drunk it is still the man the one who is a rapist. DUUH. Obviously. And by WE I mean us () sweet innocent feminists of the world.

Show less

Sarah W

Yesterday 2:31 PM

+Izzy Yes and we just got a new reason this very Memorial Day Weekend with the Santa Barbara shooting! A 22 year old man left a disturbing video detailing how much he hated women because they didn't want him, threatened to walk into a sorority house and kill all the girls there, and then actually went on a shooting rampage. Link here:http://time.com/113948/elliot-rodger-ucsb-santa-barbara/

Not all men are rapists. No one is saying that. But women are taught, in our society, to fear men. Louis CK explains another side of it quite well here: "There is no greater threat to women than men" - Louis CK

Show less

Danika

Yesterday 3:41 PM

+JOEN4 I think you're just being difficult. I don't know why you've convinced yourself to be completely in the right here, but if there's anything I've learned about you by reading this conversation is that you're a scary person and could do with some sexual harassment education if you truly believe there is absolutely nothing in the least ethically wrong about Thicke's video/song.

Show less

JOEN4

Yesterday 5:17 PM

What exactly makes you think I'm a scary person because I'm calling shenanigans on this crap? If you've been reading this conversation and saw the part where I talked about calling the police on people I witnessed assaulting women.

I defy you to find any example of me doing or saying anything "scary" in anything I've said. That is just you using shaming language to write off someone you disagree with.

Wyer 61

And yes, I truly believe that there's nothing ethically wrong with Thicke's song. He as a right to his opinion and he's right to express it. There is no ethical violation in someone saying things you don't like. And I'm quite aware of sexual harassment law- that's why I only get sexual with willing participants, as Mr. Thicke is doing.

And no, I'm not complaining just to be complaining- this sort of toxic "rape culture" myth is corrupting the discourse on sexual freedom.

Show less

Sarah W

Yesterday 6:29 PM

+JOEN4 Have you seen none of the several articles from reputable sources (TIME magazine, The Washington Post, Forbes, etc.) that I have posted? The US is experiencing rape culture, and just because you seem to refuse to check the sources and keep up to date with the news does not mean that it isn't there. Your assertion that rape culture is against sexual freedom is unfounded, and although you seem quite keen on Thicke being able to express his opinion and practice freedom of speech, you do not seem to be willing to let the commentators on this thread do the same. Here are even more sources for you on why and how rape culture is a problem in our country: http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/men-its-time-to-stop-rape-denying-cultures-existence http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/21/steubenville-makes-rape-culture-harder-to-deny/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture http://www.shakesville.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

Again, I think you are confused about what rape culture is and what it means. I hope these sources are helpful to you. Saying that rape culture is a myth is very damaging to the women and men who are fighting against it. Again, if you need more sources I am happy to provide them.

Show less

Moop

Yesterday 6:31 PM

+Danika Allaire Tell me what's more scary. A few opinions that Thicke's song is lousy and not perpetuating "rape-culture" or Izzy41603's comment about how rape is worse than killing? Seriously? So it's better to be dead then to have the chance to recover, go through therapy, become stronger from the trauma and return to normal living? Is that truly standing up for women? How is being dead uplifting? Wyer 62

It's scary that you support people like that. It's scary that you only see your point of view and think others need to be "re-educated". Bigotry is correct in describing her and sadly you as well. With her same logic we should fear Muslims, Blacks, Jews, Latinos as well. After all they're giving us reasons to fear them. Watch out for dark skinned people, they will rob, kill or worse RAPE you. Rape changes you therefore, its better to die.

Show less

Izzy

Yesterday 6:59 PM

I'm not saying death is always preferable, but I have known of many women who simply cannot bear the pain that lingers after a sexual assault, and end up taking their lives. Some can go through therapy, some can recover, some can move on. Some cannot, and in those instances, many of them would have preferred death to what happened to them.

I never brought race into this (and really, I get the whole 'dark-skinned other is scary' stereotype you're working off of, because of recent Islamic terrorists, or black and latin gang activity, but what have the Jews done that's reason to fear them?), and I wouldn't, because race isn't the issue here.

I want you to think for a moment about Schrodinger's cat. A cat is put into a box, and we are unable to see it. So, it could be alive, or it could be dead, when we open the box. We will not know until we open the box. Men are the same. They could be a perfectly nice person. They could be a rapist. We never know until they attack us. That is why we are taught to be constantly on our guard, because we never know what will be in that box.

Show less

JOEN4

Yesterday 8:12 PM

Schrodinger's rapist is malarkey and reveals your own sense of entitlement. The only way that I am obligated to prove to you that I am not a rapist is by not raping you. Do you consider yourself obligated to prove you aren't a criminal degenerate? Of course not.

And for the record, as far as I'm concerned, one sure fire way to guarantee you don't get raped from a social encounter (as opposed to randomly assaulted) is to go on with crap like this- I sure as hell don't want to have sex with someone who is weighing whether or not I'm a rapist. And no- that's not something most women have to consider. Most people learn who others are based on what they do, not what criteria they meet.

You've somehow decided that rape (which can happen to men as well) is a special crime based on your Wyer 63

fear of it. Do you apply the Schrodinger argument to whether or not someone is a murderer or an arsonist or a burglar or an embezzler or any other crime? I doubt it. If you do, there's probably something wrong with you and you need help. And I'm not saying that to insult you- I'm saying that because really, deeply and truly I believe it would make your life better.

There's another reason to take self-defense classes: because if you don't carry yourself like a pushover, people usually aren't inclined to treat you like one.