Laurie Penny

Pop culture and radical politics with a feminist twist

Rihanna and our mock concern for women's dignity

Taking a stand against sexism isn't the same as taking a stand against sex.

By Laurie Penny Published 30 September 2011 11:43

So, Rihanna. She's a slag, isn't she? Such, at least, is the verdict of the tabloid press, who have once again queued up to pile opprobrium on the singer, following the example of one Alan Graham, a Northern Irish farmer who shot to fame after asking Rihanna to put her breasts away and leave his field, where she had been shooting the video for her new hit, We Found Love.

Writing for the Daily Mail, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown -- a columnist I normally admire -- praises Farmer Graham for making "a brave stand against two of the worst excesses of modern life: the sexualisation of society and our celebrity culture." She says that Graham is almost alone in taking this stand, and that she "hugely admire(s)" him.

I can't agree. I could be wrong, but I'll bet against the likelihood of this elderly fundamentalist Christian having feminist concerns at the forefront of his mind when he chose to reprimand a young woman for showing her naked body in his fields. Mistaking religious prudery for feminism gets you ten whole points in "liberals missing the issue" bingo, but there is something additionally abhorrent about the way in which this older man is being commended for stepping in, as if he were saving Rihanna from her wicked ways.

The debate about whether popular culture has become too "sexualised" is hardly restricted to Bangor, NI -- it's a debate that has run and run in nearly every major paper for over two years, partly because it's simply gagging to be illustrated with full-colour examples of such "sexualisation" for readers to cut out and keep.

It is interesting that Rihanna -- not only one of the most prominent women of colour working in pop, but a woman who is well-known for speaking up about her own experience of domestic violence -- should have become the chief scapegoat in this new culture war.

Disapproving, lip twisting pseudo-feminist articles about whether or not music videos and trainer adverts are going to turn all girls under 12 into knicker-tossing teen harlots who can hardly turn on MTV without becoming pregnant or syphilitic are usually accompanied by pictures of Rihanna in her underwear.

Sometimes it's Lady Gaga, but Gaga is weird and confusing and you never quite know when she's going to turn up dressed as a man, a lobster or all three volumes of Marx's Das Kapital at once, as opposed to the standard alien vinyl barbie look of which certain sections of the curtain-twitching middle classes love to disapprove.

No, for real, quality disapproval, it has to be Rihanna. We love to disapprove of her. We love to disapprove of her cute, pert bottom; we love to disapprove of her luscious breasts and smooth skin, barely covered by those disgustingly small leather thongs she likes to wear, the hussy. Look at her sexualising our children. Look at her, sexualising away in those horrifyingly sexualised sexy pants. We disapprove of those, too.

The hypocrisy is obvious, and it's not just the Daily Mail, which rather topped the pile by linking, in the middle of their piece on the Farmer Graham story, to another article about how "Smoking Hot!" Rihanna looked in the exact same video shoot, which they illustrated with the exact same photos, this time naming her the "Queen of Seduction".

This two-faced neo-puritanism makes mock concern for women's dignity just another reason to print enormous close-ups of their soft bits in not too much. There are po-faced men in garages across middle England who will pay a lot for that sort of disapproval, disapproval that stops extremely short of actually asking for change, because change doesn't sell papers.

I'm not saying that there are no problems at all with Rihanna's brand of arse-out sexual commodification becoming a standard feature of female celebrity -- although give the girl credit, at least she isn't claiming, as others do, that it's a non-stop shuttle to planet empowerment.

I'm not saying that there aren't big, big problems with the kind of raunch culture that has made Rihanna rich. What I am saying is that perhaps, just perhaps, the best way to address those problems might not be to applaud a religious fundamentalist for telling a young woman to cover herself up in his presence.

Some people can't seem to understand the difference between taking a stand against sexism and taking a stand against sex, but it's a distinction that we must make if we want a women's movement that's smart and brave and useful.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Daily Mail

More from Laurie Penny

53 comments

Fri, 2011-09-30 20:55 — Abdoujaparov (not verified)

verbiage

Sun, 2011-10-02 16:09 — john woods (not verified)

Ivan Militech says: "

"Her inability to express herself properly is clearly not limited to her oral performance!"

What do you know about Laurie Penny's oral performance? I am intrigued.

Fri, 2011-09-30 23:56 — Eddy S (not verified)

we do need to object to the sexualisation of our society especially when it comes to young girls, whether it's magazines or tops with in-appropriate messages - this is not just a message that concerns muslims it concerns all of our society. I agree with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown on this one.

Sun, 2011-10-02 19:14 — Fraziel1

Stuart, i have a wide and varied musical taste but never once have i bought a cd because i thought the person was attractive or had their tits out. And wtf has cheering up my neighbourhood got to do with anything? At the risk of sounding like her demographic, Rihanna sucks, end of.

Sat, 2011-10-01 00:31 — kenny jenkins (not verified)

Excellent PR stunt by Rhianna. I hope the farmer gets a fair cut

Sun, 2012-02-26 17:14 — Taggart

Society is obsessed with sex and celebrity culture and Rihanna is, lets face it, an appalling role model with minimal talent who feels she needs to get her tits out to get attention and sell records. Lots of pop stars show a bit of flesh ( Kylie, Gaga etc) but they don't use it to sell records in the same way that Rihanna does. http://www.furniture101.net/

Sat, 2011-10-01 01:02 — Dickie1

It must be my age, but I have no interest in her music, nor her body. One more cavorting musical infant - cheap as burgers, duller than chips. This is only what must be hated: capitalist tit-flashing cushioned by a media fracas.

There is no point applying thought to this kind of thing. However, though each week it gets harder I do look forward to reading what you write.

Sat, 2011-10-01 03:14 — James (not verified)

It's his land, and there's nothing wrong with him telling ANYONE who comes on his land to get off it. I also think it's stupid to assume he's a fundamentalist and his only motivation is that he hates sex and/or women. I highly doubt that. I wouldn't want someone running around on my property naked either, and I'm a woman who likes women AND sex. But there are boundaries. There are some things that are just inappropriate. Rihanna's behaviour often crosses that line - it's like she's slowly edging closer to becoming a porn star, and her concerts are edging closer to becoming live sex shows. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if one day she crossed that line entirely. It's a pity, too, because her voice is truly beautiful, as is her face, and she doesn't have to show the world her breasts and gyrate on stage in order to be famous.

Sat, 2011-10-01 04:08 — stuart (not verified)

what a bunch of miserable prudes you men are in here,moaning and groaning about a woman having a bit fun while you lot look at your online porno movies to release your sexual tension,,do i detect a little bit of racism here james?? i say good luck to rihanna and she has more balls than any of you misery guts males in here..

Sat, 2011-10-01 08:29 — Straussuk kan (not verified)

I fanatise being in the hot tub with Laurie dressed has a mermaid, I love talking dirty with expensively educated, socialists, whoops sorry what a give away, you can delete, this?

Sat, 2011-10-01 09:13 — Richard Albright1

"elderly fundamentalist Christian" Mr Alan Graham maybe 'elderly' but who says he a 'fundamentalist Christian' Miss Penny farmers don't care much for anyone trampling all-over their fields particularly those that haven't asked for permission.

Sat, 2011-10-01 09:51 — Fergus Pickering (not verified)

I'd never heard of her. It does SEEM that the term harlot might be fairly accurate. And why not? Harlots of the world unite!

Sat, 2011-10-01 10:23 — Billy Blofeld (not verified)

I quickly bored of this article and gave up once I hit Laurie's first idiotic signature phrase:

"elderly fundamentalist Christian"

In Laurie Penny Top Trumps "young" people trump all others, which is oddly why she uses "elderly" as pejorative term here.

Second up is "Christian" which in Laurie's world is trumped by any other religion, especially if the believer of that religion might have a dusky skin tone.

The word "fundamentalist" confirms her dislike of the guy in question.

If this bloke had been a "young Muslim man" then of course Laurie's article would have argued the exact opposite, because her prejudices would be reversed.

Sun, 2011-10-02 23:39 — Ivan Miletitch

to John Woods .... ahahah you know what I mean, but seriously, heard her on Question time & some interviews & it was dreadful! An inarticulate 17 year old would do better!

Sat, 2011-10-01 11:17 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

stuart: trust me, Rihanna is an airhead if ever there was one. And I mean an AIRHEAD.

Sun, 2011-10-09 22:38 — Assia W. (not verified)

I agree that Rihanna is talented and that one shouldn't expressly judge her solely for the way she dresses on stage but having said that I get worryingly uncomfortable when I watch her perform in next to nothing and this despite that a) I'm female b) straight c) not a christian fundamentalist and d) anyway in my home town see all kinds of bodies slinging themselves down the street on a friday night. I wouldn't want a daughter of mine emulating her style - Rihanna is someone who is beautiful and talented enough to perform dressed and still be able to impress an audience and that, surely ought to be the key point here. In her particular music scene however Rihanna is, inevitably surrounded and followed by a load of gangsta men who expect girls to sing and dance half naked and she knows that and acts accordingly. It's black 'culture' anyway for a woman to be a 'Ho' in order to be desirable.
I know which feminist viewpoint you're coming from, Laurie - that women and celeb women should be allowed to dress and act as they want - but you should also remember that some of those clothing preferences are ones that women only have because they have been conditioned by men to have them, whether consciously or unconsciously. I'd say bravo to any western man that asks a woman to actually cover up these days - it's rare to to find one that would do that, let alone find a woman who feels comfortable enough NOT to undress in front of an audience, in front of society.
Feminism is about much more than just one's ability to wear things in public, you know.

Sun, 2011-10-09 22:43 — Assia W. (not verified)

"Feminism is about much more than just one's ability to wear things in public, you know."

Woops. ' things' was suppoused to be 'thongs'. But never mind. I guess it's a nice way of wrapping ( pardon the pun) up anyway because actually half the time this banter about underwear and shouting about women being branded as slags, is, woefully about all that you're normally normally have to say on feminist issues. Maybe it's about time you grew up and moved on to something more serious?

Fri, 2011-09-30 13:46 — Marcus (not verified)

Good article.

I dont blame the right wing press as many do. I blame the cardboard cut out dying culture of the west..........

We, as society are no longer offended by anything other than crimes against kids and the infirm. Therefore in order to generate press mentions young women deem it (rightly or wrongly) neccessary to strip off and be "edgy" in order to play the game and further their careers within the press machine who fulfill there roles with peephole style coverage.

Young men talk about extreme violence, chemicals, petulant violence against women and 'pimpin' in order to get the same effect.

"Edgy" and pushing the boundaries has become boring and as it has become that norm it has corrupted society . It is therefore is not edgy by definition anymore.

It seems to me that edgy is now talking about tea and scones at the Tory PArty conference.

Yes, Tories are the new counter culture elite!

Fri, 2011-09-30 12:21 — Jimmy Richards (not verified)

Not to seem pedantic or anything, but I'm pretty sure you don't earn points in bingo, liberals missing the point variety or otherwise.

Sat, 2011-10-01 18:36 — Gerry Tierney (not verified)

Laurie, I think you're even losing your own message. You have been churning out the most confused and conflicting arguments for a long while now.

There is literally no victory with you, nothing which any man can do is good enough.

Women are displayed as pieces of meat? Point against men.

Man asks woman to not be almost nude on his land? Point against men.

Get a grip, you're embarassing us on the left.

Fri, 2011-09-30 12:47 — Raymond Parker (not verified)

Interesting. Presumably, if the man objected to a nudist invasion of his property, we would be saying fair enough. But, because the party in question is famous, he must be making a grand statement about gender equality, sexualisation of our culture and the existence of God. The message that I'm getting here is that if you are famous and good looking enough (she's nothing special), you should be allowed to do what you want and no ordinary person should have the right to stop you, especially if said person is ignorant enough to attend regular church services.

Tue, 2011-10-04 18:16 — karmar

Straussuk kan
01 October 2011 at 07:29

"I fanatise being in the hot tub with Laurie dressed has a mermaid, I love talking dirty with expensively educated, socialists, whoops sorry what a give away, you can delete, this?". .....................................Learn how to use punctuation. Your writing makes you look very ignorant.

Fri, 2011-09-30 12:50 — Alex Morgan (not verified)

I think given it's his land he's got every right to tell her to put some clothes on and not really our business whatever his reasons are. I think my Dad would feel the same whether it was a male or female.
However I totally agree about the Daily Mail's faux outrage accompanied by lots of photos of scantily clad women. It should be called the Daily Bikini. There are elements of our sexualised culture which I find problematic, but I think the obsession with sexualisation is just odd and is often an effort to control the versions of sexuality which are considered to be 'acceptable'.

Tue, 2011-10-04 18:20 — karmar

"do i detect a little bit of racism here james??" ..................Clearly not as there wasn't any. Perhaps don't post unless you have something of value to offer??

Fri, 2011-09-30 12:58 — sianushka (not verified)

completely agree. an important feminist debate about how women are seen and how this impacts on sexism and sexual violence, has been co-opted by right wing movement of 'won't somebody think of the children' pearl clutching prudery.

this isn't about dignity for women, this is about selling papers and outrage over women's bodies.

Fri, 2011-09-30 13:48 — JCollins (not verified)

I wouldn't want a woman writhing around in a bikini (or whatever) for money on my property either - it's tawdry. Good for him.

Fri, 2011-09-30 14:09 — Stuart Eels (not verified)

I didn't think this would be Laura Penny's next big crusade, however I either heard it on R5 or on television that she had asked permission to use his field. If that's right he should have had no objections.

Sat, 2011-10-01 21:37 — Peter (not verified)

Laurie,

Having always found your writing massively annoying and ill-informed I thought I'd give you another chance after your rather good (if needlessly melodramatic - ooh, I'm at home and the whole city is on fire!) piece about the London riots.

Just so's you know, the grace period is up, and I have returned to being content in my expectation that everything published under your name will continue to be embarassing shite.

Actually, it's worse than that. What you have here is prejudice in its most blatant form: anything a Christian does must be bad, even if it's something you might have done too. So you decide that it must be simple "prudery" that caused this bloke's actions. You have no clue. Do you think any institution as influential as the Christian church has lasted as long as it has by having such a blunt and crude attitude to sex? Actually, you clearly have never considered the question at all, because you've decided just to accept a cartoon version of Christianity that has come down to you from the infallible scriptures of the Guardian et al who feed your unthinking mind with a stream of stories designed simply to discredit that faith.

In fact, Laurie, it's you who is the cartoon. A joke of a leftie-feminist-atheist who might tick all of the right boxes but is actually full of bile, scorn and arrogance towards those who fail to fit her worldview.

I mean, honestly, the cheek of anyone, even an Irish farmer, to dare to be a "Christian fundamentalist" (a term I'd love to see you try to define in any serious forum) in a world where Ms Penny's enlightening articles offer a doorway to intellectual (and indeed sexual!) liberation that this chap so stubbornly refuses to step through...

Keep going Laurie. Maybe one day you'll have an original thought. Only thing is there might not be anyone left reading by that point!

Sat, 2011-10-01 21:44 — Peter (not verified)

Hi Laurie, back for more!

Just a quickie, why do you assume (as it seems you do) that feminist and Christian concerns can't overlap (never heard of Christian Feminism?), or at least share a lot of the same root?

If a Christian feels that some behaviours and attitudes (in men or women) demean people's dignity, and are against them on those grounds, is that really so different from the concerns of a feminist?

Remember Laurie, Feminism is for Lovers, but so is Christianity!

http://feminismisforlovers.tumblr.com/

Fri, 2011-09-30 14:32 — Lee (not verified)

I don't think it's a "mock concern" in the religious case. They have awful anti-feminist solutions, but the concern is a genuine human thing.

Strangely we have gone from female pop singers dressing slightly provocatively, to female pop singers getting their boobs out to boost their career when it's grinding to a halt, to female pop singers practically naked as part of their main act. Women in mainstream music seem to have become less and less human and more and more objectified.

Clearly prudism won't solve anything, but what is the solution? Culturally, that is simple, as a society we need to view sex in a more naturalistic (Eastern?) way rather than our western view which is shaped from centuries of sexist religious dogma. But how can that be applied politically?

Sat, 2011-10-01 23:23 — john woods (not verified)

In tests, eight out of ten feminazis said they preferred whiskers.

Fri, 2011-09-30 14:56 — Andy (not verified)

"Disapproving, lip twisting pseudo-feminist articles about whether or not music videos and trainer adverts are going to turn all girls under 12 into knicker-tossing teen harlots who can hardly turn on MTV without becoming pregnant or syphilitic are usually accompanied by pictures of Rihanna in her underwear."

I laughed so hard at that point that a bit of wee nearly came out. Good article Laurie!

Sat, 2011-10-01 23:26 — Jo (not verified)

I'm not really convinced by the notion that Rihanna is a useful example to be co-opted into the feminist cause. She may be the product of the culture that produced her, but she has been particularly unhelpful (as Anita has already mentioned) with regard to domestic violence against women by both minimising it in itself and also equating it for the benefit of her public with S&M.

Fri, 2011-09-30 14:57 — Anonymous Coward (not verified)

The old bloke who didn't want the video shot on his land thought he was a feminist but was in fact a fundamentalist Christian? What research led you to conclude this?

Sun, 2011-10-02 00:19 — Adam (not verified)

I doubt Rhianna will be covering Day Trip to Bangor by Fiddler's Dram any time soon...

Fri, 2011-09-30 15:47 — David (not verified)

Er, Laurie... What exactly are you railing against? The Daily Mail or someone who makes decisions about what happens on his property?

You are also incorrect about the 'sexualisation' debate. It's been going on for at least ten years.

Sun, 2011-10-02 02:58 — Ivan Miletitch

Lets sum it up, as far as Laurie Penny is concerned, women can say/do anything they like because they are women. Men are all potential abusers & are always wrong because they are men (unless of course they agree with L Penny)
And I agree with one of the previous bloggers, 'exact same' is completely incorrect, but I'm not surprised, having heard her on various radio programs "like, actually" in every sentence, her inability to express herself properly is clearly not limited to her oral performance!

Fri, 2011-09-30 16:00 — M Walker (not verified)

"I'll bet against the likelihood of this elderly fundamentalist Christian having feminist concerns at the forefront of his mind when he chose to reprimand a young woman for showing her naked body in his fields"

- No one is claiming he has feminist motives
- His concerns aren't legitimate as they are Christian in origin?
- He is standing up against sexual commodification but he's an elderly man, worse yet a Christian and even further beyond the pale an Ulster Unionist. Therefore what he says and does is bad
- How is this guy part of society's hypocrisy as expemplified by the Mail? He is being true to his personal values whether you share them or not

Sun, 2011-10-02 09:20 — Yakoub (not verified)

"Yasmin Alibhai-Brown -- a columnist I normally admire"

Bit disappointed with that, really. I thought you'd be aware of how much Alibi-Brain is loathed by Muslims right across the religious and political spectrum. There aren't that many NON-Muslims who write about my community with the same degree of shrill ignorance as YAB.

Fri, 2011-09-30 16:31 — Barny

Excellent little piece highlighting the cultural hypocrisy around sex. Yet again you bring out the bizarre lunatic commentators with their warped logic : )

Fri, 2011-09-30 16:43 — anne warren

Had Mr Graham, a Bangor councillor,(DUP?), allowed Rihanna to continue shooting her video in his field, he would probably have received very few votes in the next election. His reaction was dictated more by self-interest than anything else.

Fri, 2011-09-30 17:05 — Iden (not verified)

M Walker

Think you missed the point mate. The Alibhai-Brown in the DM is the one who conflates the farmer's argument with a (failed) pseudo-feminist position.

"His concerns aren't legitimate as they are Christian in origin?" - There's no way I can say this without sounding rude but here it is: religiously motivated objections to sex are never legitimate. They are grounded in sketchy interpretations of Bronze Age mythology.

"He is being true to his personal values whether you share them or not"
Very true, and it wasn't his fault that the Mail and others picked up on his earnest expression of Bronze Age ideology and used it as a stick with which to bash women and preach a false, sanctimonious morality whilst simultaneously publishing zoomed-in pictures of her T&A, but they did, so here we are.

Fri, 2011-09-30 17:25 — David (not verified)

oh, shut it, love.

Fri, 2011-09-30 17:26 — Anita (not verified)

Rihanna deserves all the criticism she gets. She's become rich by dressing & dancing like a 2nd rate lapdancer to make up for her minimal talent. I'm surprised that a feminist like you is defending her. BTW she has done nothing for victims of domestic violence except make a song glamorising it.

Fri, 2011-09-30 17:28 — James (not verified)

It is clear to me that men are responsible for the behaviour and way Rhianna and Lady Gaga, and in Britain, Girls Aloud and The Saturdays, behave and present themselves.
I am generalising but: the music producers are men; the writers are men; men run the advertising: men run the record companies. These women obviously have men in mind when they decide on how they behave. Men are clearly respnsible. I agree, Laurie, it is therefore unfair to have a go at Rhianna herself.
The real question is why men are treating women in this way; they are much more angry, resentful and vitriolic than 50 years ago. 50 years ago, women were presented as happy,alluring, and god-like.
I think feminist legislation is to blame. The more laws you have to protect women, the more it makes men feel like they are under watch by the state; the more it makes men feel like they aren't responsible for women's happiness and security; and the more it makes the majority of men,who want the women in their lives to be happy, feel like they are odd and unusual that they don't want to rape or beat them.
The pornification of society, the exploitation of women, and the vitriolic and unkind way women are treated in the media, are the consequence of second wave state feminism.

Sun, 2011-10-02 11:19 — Dickie1

'exact same' is completely incorrect

I have the feeling Laurie was being emphatic: 'the very same' though that would be verging on archaism. You also missed out that she used the article 'the' which would have been a give away.

Fri, 2011-09-30 17:41 — Phil Daniels (not verified)

Penny, Sorry, but I wish you hadn't written "with the exact same photos" but "with exactly the same photos". Maybe I'm exaggerating.

Sun, 2011-10-02 12:54 — Fraziel1

I do not like Rihanna as her music is vapid shite for x factor watching teenagers and all she sings about is f*cking ( for Gods sake can she not think of anything else). Society is obsessed with sex and celebrity culture and Rihanna is, lets face it, an appalling role model with minimal talent who feels she needs to get her tits out to get attention and sell records. Lots of pop stars show a bit of flesh ( kylie, gaga etc) but they dont use it to sell records in the same way that Rihanna does.I am no prude but i think your talent should be what sells the music not your arse and tits.

I guess my attitude is that anything that pisses off Rihanna has to be a good thing.Well done Mr farmer for telling her to get lost, even if you did do it for the wrong reasons.Mind you only a leftie feminist beardie weirdie could be offended by his doing it though.Get a life Laurie,

Fri, 2011-09-30 19:08 — stuart (not verified)

i like the way rihanna shakes her booty and teases men all the time..very nice indeed