Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Robin Thicke gets torn apart on Twitter Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think people who get offended by his songs need to grow up. Ridiculous that people found the tweets funny/amusing




    Check out TSR Movie Madness
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry buddy but the point still stands that this is a song that extremely objectifies women, and the backlash is justified. The line 'I know you want it' is repeated consistently throughout the song, and has caused anger because it is something commonly used in a rapist's defence in court, in that the victim wore clothing or acted in a way that led the attacker to believe that they wanted to sleep with them, which is meant to justify not waiting for consent. The 'blurred lines' can aldo directly refer to this, as Thicke isn't sure if she actually wants 'it' but goes ahead with it regardless. Also, T.I. plays his part with the lines "let me be the one man that you answer to/I (something) to tear that ass in two." The first line doesn't need to be explained (I hope) but the 'tear that ass in two' is used as a reference to how men 'surprise' women with penetrative anal sex, despite not receiving consent but misplacing trust by doing this during consensual vaginal sex.

    I see your point about rappers, but all of the examples you've given are fairly old, and a lot of new rap songs do not feature lyrics like this, with those that do coming under fire for doing so! For example, Beyoncé's 'Drunk in Love' features Jay Z saying "Eat the Cake Anna Mae...I'm Ike, Turner" which are all outright references to Tina Turner's abusive forner husband and their relationship. This has been criticised to the hills and back, and many places refuse to play it as a result. Also, the somewhat despicable Chris Brown song about Hoes being loyal has received a wealth of justified criticism, and that doesn't even glorify rape! It simply implies that women can be traded around by men, choosing to sleep with those that have the most money and that this defines their loyalty and ultimate worth. Disgusting.

    The would-be funny thing is that misogyny has always been a fairly prevalent factor in music. Think of The Beatles and how patronising their lyrics are to women, at least in the early days. Elvis is another offender, as are the Rolling Stones! However, theirs was a product of the time and environment, and is at least a non-threatening type of misogyny. This new **** is so out of place in modern society.
    Can we revisit this 'objectifying' argument? Do women not objectify women? Let's take Kim Kardashian for example. Is her whole life not to live up to a male fantasy of what a woman should be? The bum implants, the breast implants, the plastic surgery and countless other procedures? I am a female myself, and I cringe when I hear the objectifying argument, because women have been objectifying themselves for their own gain for centuries now.

    Also, I guess you're not a hip hop fan as they nearly all (in one album or another) have a track which is misogynistic to say the least.
    N***as in Paris:
    Jay-z 'I got that hot b**** in my home... Kanye: 'Do you know how many hot b****** I own?'
    I see plenty of females screech the lyrics to Chris Brown's 'Loyal' without second thought. It wouldn't have reached top 4 on the billboard 100 if only males were buying and listening to it. I just think the whole 'objectifying' argument is very weak now.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Sorry buddy but the point still stands that this is a song that extremely objectifies women, and the backlash is justified. The line 'I know you want it' is repeated consistently throughout the song, and has caused anger because it is something commonly used in a rapist's defence in court, in that the victim wore clothing or acted in a way that led the attacker to believe that they wanted to sleep with them, which is meant to justify not waiting for consent. The 'blurred lines' can aldo directly refer to this, as Thicke isn't sure if she actually wants 'it' but goes ahead with it regardless. Also, T.I. plays his part with the lines "let me be the one man that you answer to/I (something) to tear that ass in two." The first line doesn't need to be explained (I hope) but the 'tear that ass in two' is used as a reference to how men 'surprise' women with penetrative anal sex, despite not receiving consent but misplacing trust by doing this during consensual vaginal sex.

    ....
    :nothing:

    "I know you want it", or something to that effect, is a line used in so many songs, written by both women and men. It doesn't always imply a rape-like context. "She was pretty" and "I thought she liked me" are also 'rapist excuses', and how often are these devices used in songs? All the damn time - and so what?

    The "objectification of women" argument here is becoming tired and, quite frankly, dumb. Songs with lyrics about sex or portraying someone in a sexual manner are incredibly common, they're written by both men and women, they don't hurt anybody, and they are all 'objectifying' people in a similar fashion -- that is, they are talking about somebody's sex appeal and physical looks in lieu of anything else (although, I would argue that no-body wants to have sex with an object). There are songs about how rugged or cute men are -- objectification. There are songs about men's penises -- objectification. There are songs about boobs -- objectification. There are songs about eyes -- objectification. And so the **** what?

    This song, though risqué, is talking about a woman dancing with a man in a provocative manner -- but she has a boyfriend, and he is frustrated that boundaries are preventing them from having sex, because he thinks she's in to him and that he'll be a more satisfying sexual partner to her. That's essentially it. The song is not about a man forcing himself on a woman without her consent. And then you're over-analysing the more sexual lines and deliberately interpreting them in the most negative manner possible.

    I don't mean to get get personal, but contentious, self-righteous rabble-rousers like you who try to spin everything they can find into some sort of 'threat' against women bother me to no end :hmpf:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The credit for the song, including the lyrics was shared between the 3 artists. How much heat is Pharrell taking for this for example? I'm sure plenty of the feminists who take time out of their day to attack Robin Thicke on twitter, were quite happy to line Pharrell's pockets when Happy came out. Its more a Robin Thicke is a sleazy creep feminist witch hunt than anything else.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Sorry buddy but the point still stands that this is a song that extremely objectifies women, and the backlash is justified. The line 'I know you want it' is repeated consistently throughout the song, and has caused anger because it is something commonly used in a rapist's defence in court, in that the victim wore clothing or acted in a way that led the attacker to believe that they wanted to sleep with them, which is meant to justify not waiting for consent. The 'blurred lines' can aldo directly refer to this, as Thicke isn't sure if she actually wants 'it' but goes ahead with it regardless. Also, T.I. plays his part with the lines "let me be the one man that you answer to/I (something) to tear that ass in two." The first line doesn't need to be explained (I hope) but the 'tear that ass in two' is used as a reference to how men 'surprise' women with penetrative anal sex, despite not receiving consent but misplacing trust by doing this during consensual vaginal sex.

    I see your point about rappers, but all of the examples you've given are fairly old, and a lot of new rap songs do not feature lyrics like this, with those that do coming under fire for doing so! For example, Beyoncé's 'Drunk in Love' features Jay Z saying "Eat the Cake Anna Mae...I'm Ike, Turner" which are all outright references to Tina Turner's abusive forner husband and their relationship. This has been criticised to the hills and back, and many places refuse to play it as a result. Also, the somewhat despicable Chris Brown song about Hoes being loyal has received a wealth of justified criticism, and that doesn't even glorify rape! It simply implies that women can be traded around by men, choosing to sleep with those that have the most money and that this defines their loyalty and ultimate worth. Disgusting.

    The would-be funny thing is that misogyny has always been a fairly prevalent factor in music. Think of The Beatles and how patronising their lyrics are to women, at least in the early days. Elvis is another offender, as are the Rolling Stones! However, theirs was a product of the time and environment, and is at least a non-threatening type of misogyny. This new **** is so out of place in modern society.
    Lol get the **** over it
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    :nothing:

    "I know you want it", or something to that effect, is a line used in so many songs, written by both women and men. It doesn't always imply a rape-like context. "She was pretty" and "I thought she liked me" are also 'rapist excuses', and how often are these devices used in songs? All the damn time - and so what?

    The "objectification of women" argument here is becoming tired and, quite frankly, dumb. Songs with lyrics about sex or portraying someone in a sexual manner are incredibly common, they're written by both men and women, they don't hurt anybody, and they are all 'objectifying' people in a similar fashion -- that is, they are talking about somebody's sex appeal and physical looks in lieu of anything else (although, I would argue that no-body wants to have sex with an object). There are songs about how rugged or cute men are -- objectification. There are songs about men's penises -- objectification. There are songs about boobs -- objectification. There are songs about eyes -- objectification. And so the **** what?

    This song, though risqué, is talking about a woman dancing with a man in a provocative manner -- but she has a boyfriend, and he is frustrated that boundaries are preventing them from having sex, because he thinks she's in to him and that he'll be a more satisfying sexual partner to her. That's essentially it. The song is not about a man forcing himself on a woman without her consent. And then you're over-analysing the more sexual lines and deliberately interpreting them in the most negative manner possible.

    I don't mean to get get personal, but contentious, self-righteous rabble-rousers like you who try to spin everything they can find into some sort of 'threat' against women bother me to no end :hmpf:
    You know I used to think in exactly the same way as you do here, but the problem isn't that women are objectified. As you've pointed out, anybody can be objectified and in some cases it's made in appreciation, which does nothing but show affection in a positive light. That's not a problem, but what is a problem is the amount that women are objectified in the media. Look at any magazine and you'll see bikini-clad women having their appearance scrutinised, and women in all media fields are constantly having comments made on their appearance, from actresses to MPs and even radio personalities! It's not the same with men, no matter how you present the argument and songs like this and Chris Brown et al only push us back as a civilisation. For what it's worth, I am a hip hop/rap fan, and I know how common misogyny is in this genre, but I'm also aware of how far we've come which is exemplified by the outcry over this song.

    Mate, call me self-righteous if you want, I don't give a ****. If believing in gender equality and the advancement of society past the knuckle dragging state it's sometimes easy to perceive it as is pretentious then fine, that's cool with me! It's because of pretentious dicks like me that progression is enabled!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He's gross. So glad I never liked him, so now I don't feel let down. Same with Chris Brown and Bieber

    &their hot mess female equivalent name Riahnna and Cyrus ughhh shiver.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    I'm hearing a lot of whining and no sign of a sandwich.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Blurred Lines was terrible an Robin Thicke is an utter d-bag, but I do think it seems like he's the only one that being attacked and yet nobody ever calls out the likes of flo-rida or pitbull.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    You know I used to think in exactly the same way as you do here, but the problem isn't that women are objectified. As you've pointed out, anybody can be objectified and in some cases it's made in appreciation, which does nothing but show affection in a positive light. That's not a problem, but what is a problem is the amount that women are objectified in the media. Look at any magazine and you'll see bikini-clad women having their appearance scrutinised, and women in all media fields are constantly having comments made on their appearance, from actresses to MPs and even radio personalities! It's not the same with men, no matter how you present the argument and songs like this and Chris Brown et al only push us back as a civilisation. For what it's worth, I am a hip hop/rap fan, and I know how common misogyny is in this genre, but I'm also aware of how far we've come which is exemplified by the outcry over this song.
    I'd argue that men are sexualised almost as often as women are, and the physcial attractiveness of a public male figure (particularly actors) is usually just as important. As there are billboards of attractive women everywhere, there are billboards of attractive men. Men are shown in equally unrealistic photographs by the fashion and beauty industry, men's physical appeal is talked about frequently in women's T.V. shows and magazines; which actor has the best abs, the best facial hair, the best butt, etc, etc. And, as a sexual species, that's perfectly fine and normal (plus, sex sells -- something true for both genders). I'd also argue that most of the physical scrutiny regarding women's appearances comes from women themselves -- how many men really care about false nails, eye liner and what shoes women wear? How many men's magazines circle cellulite and bags under women's eyes? Very few.

    And sure, there are a fair few songs and artists that portray women in a very degrading light, but I don't think Blurred Lines is really one of these, or at least not one worthy of this much attention.

    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Mate, call me self-righteous if you want, I don't give a ****. If believing in gender equality and the advancement of society past the knuckle dragging state it's sometimes easy to perceive it as is pretentious then fine, that's cool with me! It's because of pretentious dicks like me that progression is enabled!
    It just seems to me that Blurred Lines is a very stupid place to focus.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Sorry buddy but the point still stands that this is a song that extremely objectifies women, and the backlash is justified. The line 'I know you want it' is repeated consistently throughout the song, and has caused anger because it is something commonly used in a rapist's defence in court, in that the victim wore clothing or acted in a way that led the attacker to believe that they wanted to sleep with them, which is meant to justify not waiting for consent. The 'blurred lines' can aldo directly refer to this, as Thicke isn't sure if she actually wants 'it' but goes ahead with it regardless. Also, T.I. plays his part with the lines "let me be the one man that you answer to/I (something) to tear that ass in two." The first line doesn't need to be explained (I hope) but the 'tear that ass in two' is used as a reference to how men 'surprise' women with penetrative anal sex, despite not receiving consent but misplacing trust by doing this during consensual vaginal sex.

    I see your point about rappers, but all of the examples you've given are fairly old, and a lot of new rap songs do not feature lyrics like this, with those that do coming under fire for doing so! For example, Beyoncé's 'Drunk in Love' features Jay Z saying "Eat the Cake Anna Mae...I'm Ike, Turner" which are all outright references to Tina Turner's abusive forner husband and their relationship. This has been criticised to the hills and back, and many places refuse to play it as a result. Also, the somewhat despicable Chris Brown song about Hoes being loyal has received a wealth of justified criticism, and that doesn't even glorify rape! It simply implies that women can be traded around by men, choosing to sleep with those that have the most money and that this defines their loyalty and ultimate worth. Disgusting.

    The would-be funny thing is that misogyny has always been a fairly prevalent factor in music. Think of The Beatles and how patronising their lyrics are to women, at least in the early days. Elvis is another offender, as are the Rolling Stones! However, theirs was a product of the time and environment, and is at least a non-threatening type of misogyny. This new **** is so out of place in modern society.

    I've written on my thoughts about the use of the term 'objectify' before:

    ​"Objectify is word that is little more than essentially meaningless rhetoric. 'Objectify' means to bring someone down to the status of an object. This immediately sounds scary. You will often hear feminists talking about how pornography objectifies women because men aren't interested in the model's personalities, they're simply interested in seeing their bodies. But so what? There's loads of people that provide services for me who I'm not interested in the personalities of. I don't care if the postman shags sheep, I just want him to bring my post on time. I don't care what religious beliefs a sprinter has, I just would like to see him run fast. I don't really care if the builder laying my wall have some terrible disease or not, I just want them to build the wall well. That's just the way life is. Most people are 'objectified' in some way or another."
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    I think the fact this **** is news is sad. I couldn't care less about celebrities to be honest. Why don't they report real issues that are relevant to the average person?
    Because the general public has an unhealthy obsession with celebrities. Sad but true.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Mate, do you even understand the concept of feminism?

    This isn't 'whining about silly crap.' Do you think the consistent objectifying of women is 'silly crap'? Do you think the current rape culture that has grown from it as a result is 'silly crap'? Imagine having a daughter and discovering that a man had had sex with her, despite her not wanting him to purely 'for a laugh' or because 'she wanted it and she knows it!' Better yet, imagine if it was the other way 'round, and you were submitted to the same behaviour. It's not always just penetrative sex either! Unwanted physical contact is just that, and women have had to put up with being the 'inferior' sex for centuries, objectified and considered to be there purely for the entertainment of men! Now there's a growing case for the eradication of sexism, and the media is the best place to start. Think of the movies, and how often you see a pair of breasts or a vagina, compared to how often you see a penis. In fact, nudity in movies is subject to gender law, with it being illegal to show an erect penis, yet a vagina or breasts is fine, because apparently only men watch films. Don't believe me? Pick ten films that have nudity that you're aware of, and then count how many pairs of breasts or female bums you see, compared with how much of the male body you see. Even Wolf of Wall Street, an academy award nominated film containing a 'heart throb' such as Leo DiCaprio contained stupid amounts of female nudity, compared to one shot of the side of Leo's bum.

    Just so you know, I'm a straight male in my early twenties with a lot of appreciation for the female form. I watch porn and I enjoy seeing women naked, but I don't enjoy how objectified they are all over the media, ESPECIALLY in music and lyrics, where many young, impressionable listeners are able to make their own conclusions as to what the lyrics mean.
    To be fair, women in Arab countries have bigger issues than some bad pop songs.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Exon)
    Because the general public has an unhealthy obsession with celebrities. Sad but true.
    Pathetic, isn't it? Sad as well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    I've written on my thoughts about the use of the term 'objectify' before:

    ​"Objectify is word that is little more than essentially meaningless rhetoric. 'Objectify' means to bring someone down to the status of an object. This immediately sounds scary. You will often hear feminists talking about how pornography objectifies women because men aren't interested in the model's personalities, they're simply interested in seeing their bodies. But so what? There's loads of people that provide services for me who I'm not interested in the personalities of. I don't care if the postman shags sheep, I just want him to bring my post on time. I don't care what religious beliefs a sprinter has, I just would like to see him run fast. I don't really care if the builder laying my wall have some terrible disease or not, I just want them to build the wall well. That's just the way life is. Most people are 'objectified' in some way or another."
    Yes, but those people are objectified through choice, whereas many prominent fenale figures are scrutinised in the media regardless of their job, making it forceful objectification. Pornography is what it is, and I agree with you on that but having women in 'Hello' magazine having their cellulite exposed when all they've tried to do is have family time on the beach is something I'm uncomfortable with, and this may seem irrelevant but unfortunately it's not, as the centuries of objectification have led to women being consistently degraded in the public eye, and it being considered normal.

    As for the quantities of men and women that are objectified, women outweigh men tenfold. Women in all jobs are objectified, even those not in the public eye. For example, how many times have you been in a situation where a woman is ostracised from a group purely because she's wearing less make up or is larger than the others? I'm not saying ir happens all the time, but it happens more with women than it does with men and it's dangerous. It's not all because of this one song, but taking a stand against stuff like this is something to be applauded.

    Look, I know I'm unlikely to change your mind but you've written a post and I've added my opinion. I do think you should take into consideration that neither of us are women, so we cannot say how society and the media makes us feel, but I can say with some level of certainty that if a song makes this many people uncomfortable then there's no defending it!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dani California)
    To be fair, women in Arab countries have bigger issues than some bad pop songs.
    True, but it's because of people taking a stand in this country that this is the case. Thankfully, we live in a country where this can be considered a major issue for some people, and we're developed enough to be able to freely have an opinion about it!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AcronymOfHashtag)
    Yes, but those people are objectified through choice, whereas many prominent fenale figures are scrutinised in the media regardless of their job, making it forceful objectification. Pornography is what it is, and I agree with you on that but having women in 'Hello' magazine having their cellulite exposed when all they've tried to do is have family time on the beach is something I'm uncomfortable with, and this may seem irrelevant but unfortunately it's not, as the centuries of objectification have led to women being consistently degraded in the public eye, and it being considered normal.

    As for the quantities of men and women that are objectified, women outweigh men tenfold. Women in all jobs are objectified, even those not in the public eye. For example, how many times have you been in a situation where a woman is ostracised from a group purely because she's wearing less make up or is larger than the others? I'm not saying ir happens all the time, but it happens more with women than it does with men and it's dangerous. It's not all because of this one song, but taking a stand against stuff like this is something to be applauded.

    Look, I know I'm unlikely to change your mind but you've written a post and I've added my opinion. I do think you should take into consideration that neither of us are women, so we cannot say how society and the media makes us feel, but I can say with some level of certainty that if a song makes this many people uncomfortable then there's no defending it!
    I don't really believe it does make people that uncomfortable though. I think it's just group mentality. Everyone's jumped on the bandwagon. It's just popular to hate this song. It makes you appear right-on to criticize it, even if the criticism completely misinterprets the song. This kind of stuff happens all the time. It's like all the hate for Miley Cyrus. I don't think anyone really gives a toss what she does, people just like to make sure everyone knows how much they disapprove of her antics, purely because it makes them feel better about themselves.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    I don't really believe it does make people that uncomfortable though. I think it's just group mentality. Everyone's jumped on the bandwagon. It's just popular to hate this song. It makes you appear right-on to criticize it, even if the criticism completely misinterprets the song. This kind of stuff happens all the time. It's like all the hate for Miley Cyrus. I don't think anyone really gives a toss what she does, people just like to make sure everyone knows how much they disapprove of her antics, purely because it makes them feel better about themselves.
    So, your point is that you don't think people are as outraged as they seem? That's kind of a non-view. I mean, regardless of what you think, they obviously believe in it with enough conviction to have mentioned it enough to annoy you.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    He's an utter creep. Everything about 'Blurred Lines' is objectifying - the title, the lyrics, the video. His dancing with Miley Cyrus was ridiculous for a married man. He unsurprisingly separates from his wife and then weirdly names a whole album after her. I'd be creeped out if one of my exes named an album after me post-breakup when I'm still alive. He gets photographed groping people when he thinks nobody's looking and is known for being a real sleaze.

    I'm actually quite bored of hearing about him and the extremes people take in the 'censorship' debate. Deciding not to play his songs isn't censorship; it's just choice. If I run a juice bar and decide not to sell lime juice, it doesn't mean I've 'censored' lime juice, just that I don't want to sell it. Equally, it's not the only creepy or even rapey song written and I feel like the debate about whether or not to play it detracts from wider discussions about rape, sexual assault, and abuse both in and outside relationships.

    The Blurred Lines tune is catchy, annoyingly, but even so I'm sick of hearing about it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Those twitter replies were so melodramatic and cringeworthy. Some people really have a stick up their arse. And it is interesting that rappers get nowhere near the same backlash.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 4, 2014
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.