Lady Gaga and Chelsea Handler are good for men.
Sometimes pop culture actually gets it right. By that I mean cultural icons can tap into something so foreign, so crazy, so insane that it actually wakes us up to a deeper truth about ourselves through our cult worship of the stars themselves. We don’t quite know what’s happening until it’s too late.
Let me digress. One of the most influential books I ever read as a teenager was Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. I know: a real pageturner. But what I found fascinating about the book was the how Kuhn explains the way knowledge, even in science, is not absolute. Truth is a moving target and subject to groupthink, or as Kuhn calls it, a paradigm shift. We all believe the earth is flat—and that is our truth—until one day somebody sails across the Atlantic. That piece of data is a fly in the ointment of the existing belief structure. Once there are enough data points contradicting the existing paradigm, the entire edifice of what is truth has to change to a new paradigm, whether a round earth or an earth that orbits the sun or the theory of relativity.
Of course what is true of science is true of everything else too. That’s why I have always been suspect of those who lay claim to first-hand knowledge of eternal truth. I really believe that supposed facts are all relative and we are always one anomaly in the data away from having to rethink everything.
Which brings me to my two new favorite paradigm shifters, Lady Gaga and Chelsea Handler. Ask even their fans why they love them and they come up with a wide range of bizarre answers. The following, I would argue, is based on our collective intuition that these women have got something right that we all know too but have been missing for way too long.
♦◊♦
Any discussion of what it means to be a man involves what it means to be a woman. We define ourselves in large part via this inextricable dance of being male and female. Lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people are, perhaps, the most impacted by the rigid historic definitions of gender.
As we have tried to foster a nationwide discussion about what it means to be a good father, son, husband, worker, and man, we have come back again and again to how we relate to women through sex and relationships and the various ways men treat women well and not so well. It has become very clear that defining manhood in isolation is a futile exercise without the context of considering changing conceptions of what it means to be a woman.
So to talk about manhood it seems we have to be willing to talk about womanhood. And just like men are at a point of profound transition, so too are women. We have these relatively traditional vestiges of what it means to be feminine propagated by mainstream media, porn, and even politics. But under the surface there is a revolution going on against the very basis of those beliefs.
I saw Lady Gaga at Radio Music Hall when she was just on the cusp of breaking out (you can read about that here, “Poker Face: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”). One of the things I loved most about her is that she is not traditionally beautiful. She is frankly weird looking even before all the performance art and make-up. What I also loved about her then and still do now is that at the core of all the insanity is an amazing voice. Check out this a capella version of her song “Born This Way” and tell me the woman doesn’t put Madonna to shame:
I also recently watched the 60 minutes segment in which Gaga explains her “little monsters.” Her message is really for all of us, especially girls and women, who don’t fit into the traditional stereotypes of what it is to be female. She calls herself, and us by proxy, the “freaks.” In other words, the anomaly in the scientific theory about truth that has worn down at the edges so much that it is no longer working because, well, most of us no longer feel like we fit in. Her message is one of encouraging her audience to embrace their freak nature, to accept who they are with radical honesty, and thereby find the superstar hidden within.
Yes she is a brilliant choreographer of her own fame through insane fashion, half-naked performance, and self-promotion taken to the extreme. But all the swirl of activity, I would argue, is needed to break down the barrier of the edifice of truth about women that is no longer useful to them or us as men. You don’t have to be stereotypically beautiful, you don’t have to feel like a freak, you don’t have to accept homophobia, you don’t have to shun your sexuality. Be who you were born to be is the Gaga mantra.
♦◊♦
We’re a group of volunteers and opening a new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with valuable info to work on. You have done a formidable job and our entire community will be thankful to you. Vaniffin In
it is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation..h.m.
Many important points in here… truth as a moving target, Albert Einstein as a centerfold, the idea that woman– as the social outgroup or “other”– is defined as whatever the ingroup (man) is not, so when one changes the other MUST change (unless we get rid of all ideas about what men and women “should” be)… well done as always. Re-posting this on the FB wall for me cause. 🙂
I love Chelsea and Gaga too–they’re awesome AND they are gender allies.
However, it’s ironic that you’ve chosen these ladies as “revolutionary”—they still represent ideal heterosexual feminine beauty–light skinned, blonde haired, thin, petite women. That’s why they are so popular….that’s why some people like listening to them because they aren’t “threatening.”
Thankfully, they are using their privilege for good, but we still have a long way to go.
I agree with your basic thesis: the importance of breaking gender roles/stereotypes. I would also add Wanda Sykes for being an out black lesbian; Margaret Cho for being a pansexual korean; Prince, and David Bowie before him, for turning genderf#cking into art; and S. Bear Bergman for his essays on Female-to-Male transgender life/politics.
I agree with a naked Einstein being wrong, objectification-wise, but perhaps there is something to be learned from prizing bodies past their “prime” that we as a culture could learn/benefit from.
All in all, a good piece, Sir.
I liked this piece except for the following:
“Of course what is true of science is true of everything else too.”
What does that even mean?
That all truth is relative
Tom, I love this piece. I really love it. It really gets to the core of the issue for both men and women and looking within ourselves to see not only how we treat each other on the surface, but the messages we might have buried deep about our own gender and the opposite gender that aren’t based in reality, but based on perceptions sold to us through mass mentality. Men and women are undeniably intertwined. Although I will say, I do love Lady Gaga for the same reasons you expressed, her complete fearlessness and her uncharacteristic looks, she does… Read more »
Thanks Erin…nice that someone “got it”
I disagree, I think Lady Gaga perfectly fits the stereotype of a female pop star. Even though, true, her face is a bit weird looking, her body is conventionally “hot” and she uses it to it’s full advantage. I believe her stardom is 100% manufactured and I’m sure calling herself a freak is something that she and her publicists came up with to sell more song downloads. She strikes me as completely inauthentic. She’s hardly a revolutionary. Also, I’m tired of the idea that being a sex object is somehow empowering to women.
Is Chelsea a sex object? I think in both cases their fame is built around much more than their bodies, which is my point.
I haven’t watched Chelsea so I can’t comment on her.
Call me cynical, but Lady Gaga is just a pop star, like a million other pop stars. Her “freak” persona is completely manufactured, that’s my main issue with her. She’s an act created by record company executives to make money. She’s a PRODUCT. So, I think it’s a mistake to take her too seriously or see her as a revolutionary. She has a good voice, true, but the rest of it is just marketing. I’m sure everything she says and does is orchestrated by a team.
I guess wearing a meat dress and inspiring an episode of Glee makes one a cultural icon these days.
To me Lady Gaga is kind of pathetic. She tries so hard to be different…just like everybody else.
Why aren’t you wearing a meat dress then?
Lady Gaga has plugged into what it takes to become a pop star, and carefully crafted an image to accomplish that goal… and she’s used her fame to plug for LGBT issues. I really don’t think she’s trying to be different just to be different. She’s being “different” as a route to being successful.
I do wear meat on a pretty regular basis actually.