Laurie Uttich wants to pity the young women who tweet that they would let Chris Brown beat them up.
|
What do I care how inappropriate a song like this is for a woman who was so publicly abused? I get it’s S&M and consensual and all of that, but I’m not sure the fifth-grade girl I carpool with has all that figured out.
|
Rihanna and Chris Brown reconciled almost three years to the day since he bashed her face in. I’d like to say nobody gives a shit, but that’s a lie. Lots of people give a shit. After they released their “Birthday Cake” remix, Rihanna increased her fan base—Facebook friends and Twitter followers—by 19 percent. Chris Brown fared even better with approximately a 28 percent increase in Facebook friends and, yeah, I know those people are idiots, but there are over 4 million of them, or at least that’s how many are watching their “doggy want the kitty, watch me get it” reunion remix on YouTube. When Rihanna defended the reconciliation in Elle magazine this month, her comments made the news (and not just The Enquirer; CBS even picked it up yesterday in their Celebrity Circuit).
I was only mildly interested last year when Rihanna released her hit song, “S&M,” a literary triumph that offers these types of thought-provoking lyrics: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but chains and whips excite me.” Lucky for her, I thought then, that Brown’s off probation and the restraining order no longer applies. He just punched her a few times in the face, but he’s seems like a flexible kind of guy. I bet he’d use a whip.
What do I care how inappropriate a song like this is for a woman who was so publicly abused? And, yeah, I get it’s S&M and consensual and all of that, but I’m not sure the fifth-grade girl I carpool with has all that figured out. We listen to mainstream FM radio and she caught the lyrics before I did. But still, it’s not like any of us look at Rihanna as role-model material. Nobody’s lining up to say that girl there? that topless one on Twitter? that’s exactly how I want my daughter to turn out.
But I began to care in February. Chris Brown wins the Grammy and women on Twitter offer to let him beat them up. Nicole thinks I’m stupid if I don’t realize what an “honour” it is for Brown to hit me. Sharon’s not gonna lie: she’d so let so-sexy, so-hot Chris Brown beat her any day. Casey is down for Brown to punch her in the eye as long as he serenades her first. Stephanie doesn’t know why his then-girlfriend Rihanna complained: “Chris Brown can beat me any time he wanted to.”
Country singer Miranda Lambert wants to know why all of our memories are so short: “He beat on a girl,” she tweets. “Not cool that we act like that didn’t happen.” At a concert, she asks Chris Brown to “take notes” and thanks her dad for showing her how to use a shotgun. Brown’s annoyed. He can’t understand why people care about something that happened “like years ago” and whatever, haters: “I GOT A GRAMMY Now! That’s the ultimate F**** OFF!” It seems entirely possible that Rihanna’s songwriter and Chris Brown share the same creative writing strand of DNA.
I think about these women on Twitter: most of them heart-breakingly young, many of them looking like the twenty-something students who sit in my classes. I want to feel pity for these little social networking fools, some kind of sorrow for the world we’ve created that’s told these women that riding in Brown’s Lamborghini is worth having your mouth filled with blood occasionally. And I do feel it. I do. It keeps me up at night. But I am also still so very much pissed off, because whether they intend to or not, they make all young women look bad.
I’m wondering if the good men care, if they’re as pissed off as I am. Maybe they’re not. Maybe you’re all so beat down by women who claim to want a “good man” and then get dumped by someone like Brittany who Tweets “Call me crazy butttttttt I would let Chris Brown beat me up anyyyyy day.” Maybe you’ve given up trying to figure out what women want and maybe that’s because so many of us sit back and roll our eyes at these women instead of speaking up. I know most of the women my age—and many of the 20-something women I teach and love—feel as if Chris Brown and Rihanna are so unimportant and ridiculous that they’re not even worthy of a conversation. But the conversation is already happening. And when we don’t join it, we look as if we accept it.
So, let me be clear and allow me to speak for the silent, heterosexual woman who is interested in a relationship: we want you to be good men. We want to be with a good man. Some of us even want to marry one. (I did.) And some want to raise good men. (I’m trying.) We get how frustrating all this bullshit must be. And if we could get these “other” women in a room, here’s what many of us would say to them:
Go visit a damn shelter and then tell me how hot it is for some guy to bash your face in. And until you do so, please, please shut the hell up. Because we play for the same team and when you don’t get it—when you don’t get that a woman is beaten every 9 seconds in this country and more than 10 million children witness some kind of domestic abuse every year—when you don’t get that and you write your stupid social networking dumbass tweets that you think are cute, you make us all look bad. You make a mockery out of the work the people—many of them women—who came before you did to ensure you have the right to live in a safe, violence-free environment. So, please, please stop it already.
And I have one more thing I’d like to say and then we can all go back to living however we damn well please, because no matter how stupid I think Chris Brown, Rihanna, and all these various Brittanys and Caseys are… I don’t want hinder anyone’s ability to prove it online or anywhere else.
But I do want to ask all of you good men a favor: If you run into Miranda Lambert, will you please buy her a beer for me?
—Photo Sean MacEntee/Flickr
About Laurie Rachkus Uttich
Right the hell on!
This is an interesting post, I think the Chris Brows/Rihanna thing is indicative of several problems in our society, and several fundamental misunderstandings which have lead to those problems. A few month or so ago there was a post on gmp about a recently released book which chronicled the pushy tactics of the PUA community. I came in part to the defense of that community, not entirely they have serious problems and I don’t endorse some of the more pushy tactics some PUA’s use or believe is appropriate to use.
Where am I going with this you might ask? At the end of that debate I suggested that there was no community of people helping men, particularly shy men learn how to attract women, someone replied to me saying yes there is and they pointed in part to the sex positive movement, and in part to some elements of the BDSM community. I did not reply, as that is true, those communities do exist!
But those communities have a large problem, but first, the nuances of human attraction and cultural conditioning are incredibly large in number. During the last few decades feminists and others have brought the idea of complete and obvious consent into the sexual zeitgeist, and rightly so, no human man or woman wants to be raped or forced to do something they don’t want I 100% agree with the concept of consent. In all things sexual.
But this has lead to problems because it is a naive view of human interaction and sexual attraction. In part because of the madonna/whore complex and in part because of other social conditioning some women need men to be more aggressive. Both the sex-positive and the bdsm community miss that point, and our society has learned that men should never ever be even remotely pushy with women. Men have become nice guys, many women resent this! I believe no women wants a man who would actually beat her, but most women I know want a man who can take initiative, and who can exercise some dominance in many situations.
Because of this many women become frustrated with men and see someone like Chris Brown as someone who does not follow a male model which they have come to resent. I think this is unfortunate. The only way for us to figure out this mess is to come to an understanding of what men should and should not to, with out becoming doormats.
Finally I know this comment isn’t perfect and I’m sure many will misunderstand it I’m sure that I will be clarifying my points in excruciating detail if/as people respond in outraged misunderstanding but that’s ok!
Alrighty let me see if I’m understanding you here? Basically you’re saying that although there are communities that help “nice guys” and shy guys navigate sexual interactions with women, they still aren’t mainstream enough to properly counter the socially ingraine ideas that in a sexual relationship, the man is supposed to take initiative. So then you end up with women who think they’re supposed to be attracted to dominant guys, but find themselves surrounded by men who are less-dominant, in part because of the huge completely consent push, and then they end up finding men like Chris Brown attractive, particularly because of his aggression. Something like that?
Yes! Basically the reality is that there is a large community of women who want to be with a man who can take the lead. We can debate if this should be the case till were blue in the face the fact is that it is the case! But many men don’t realize that there are some areas in which they should/may need to be more dominant with women so they don’t act that way leaving many of these women frustrated. The sad result is that many of those women then turn to abusive men because the abusive men can exercise that dominance, not that they exercise it properly. I think the challenge is finding the balance no one wants to be with an abusive partner, but most people, in our society women in particular want to be with someone who can exert some dominance and confidence without taking it an abusive level.
Well I’m not a psychologist, so I don’t know if your analysis of the situation is necessarily true, though it certainly holds with a lot of what I’ve observed. Personally, though, I think the solution is to make the ideas that come out of sex-positive and bdsm communities more mainstream. If we were all open in our discussions of sex, and free from feelings of shame about what we desire, perhaps we’d have an easier time finding partners (or flings, whatever) that suit our needs. Then women who do want a dominant partner would be better equipped to look for that, without mistaking abusive for dominant. And then a shy guy might be better able to navigate the dating scene to find a woman who is interested in less-dominant guys.
Mind you, I’ve no idea how to make those ideas more mainstream, except to keep talking about them.
I can agree with that, but I still believe that there are many men who are less confident and dominant than they want to be which I believe is just as destructive potentially leading them to relationships which won’t benefit them. For example my own experience, growing up I was taught that there are two kinds of men, essentially door mats and abusers, since I didn’t want to be the latter I assumed that I must therefore be the former. But for me relationships in which I am not dominant are horrible. But it wasn’t until recently that I realized that you can be more dominant in a relationship without becoming the latter of the two models of masculinity. What I would love to see is a third model of masculinity one in which a strong good man can be praised as well. Sadly, however, that’s not what I’m seeing from society the only two choices I see for men are the two above. This is something I don’t see either the sex-positive community or the bdsm community helping with. Where is the space in the discussion for the man who is not abusive, yet still dominant in his life and in his relationships? Until that man has a voice, and is seen by society as a legitimate model for masculinity men will not be free to express themselves, and some women will become frustrated and pressured into choosing a man that is unfortunately the latter of the choices above!
Okay…well what you’re talking about there is gender roles, and so the places that are discussing the definition of “man” would be the lgbt community and sites like this one. GBT men have been examining what it means to be a man for decades. But also, with regards to nuanced definitions of dominant, I think the bdsm community does help with that. The idea that the submissive in a d/s relationship is actually the one with more control, for example, certainly challenges the idea that a man needs to be either a doormat or an abuser. I think the key, particularly with bdsm culture, is to take a lot of what is practised and extrapolate it, and perhaps water it down somewhat, so that it can be integrated into mainstream society.
I guess I’m beating a dead horse here seeing as this post is not over a week old, but regardless the conclusion to this back and forth has been bugging me. The problem with the bdsm community is simply that fact that things are negotiated. Of course I would never suggest that a couple should not communicate but we must be clear constant negotiation is not always an option in real life. The fallacy of bdsm is that it accepts that one person may want to be either dominant or submissive, but rejects that as part of their nature instead condoning it only in a state of “play” Anyway, this has nothing to do with Chris Brown, just a response to the idea that the bdsm community has something relevant to say about some woman’s need for dominant men. My point was and still is, we must teach men how to be dominant without being abusive, your point comes off to me to be the opposite, my perception of what you have said leads me to believe you would say we must teach women to accept submissive men. The truth is that a little of both is true.
I actually had to re-read my comment because I’d sort of forgotten what I’d said, lol. Anyway, yeah I wasn’t saying that women need generally accept submissive men, or that men generally need to be more dominant. I’m always about the individual…I’m saying that people need to be better able to accept themselves, and that society shouldn’t condemn or praise one type over another type.
Your phrase “teach men to be dominant without being abusive,” strikes a bit of a disharmonious chord with me…and I think it’s because of the implication that men need to learn to be dominant. I don’t think that’s true any more than women need to learn to be submissive, or dominant, or whatever. I think we need to teach men (and women) to be themselves…and we need to teach men that they can be dominant without being abusive, certainly. I think that’s what I’d add to your phrase…the word “can,”…that it’s not a requirement of being a man, but that it is certainly an option.
“The fallacy of bdsm is that it accepts that one person may want to be either dominant or submissive, but rejects that as part of their nature instead condoning it only in a state of “play.”"
That’s not entirely true. A sub (or a dom) isn’t taking on that role only for the sake of “play” in a sexual setting. It’s about expressing aspects of their nature in a sexual setting…but it’s not viewed as something divorced from who they really are, or something. At least, not in the bdsm circles I’m familiar with.
And, what I said at the end of my comment there is what I’ll reiterate here. I’m not saying we directly take bdsm culture and plot it onto mainstream culture…that’d be as problematic as transplanting European culture onto the Near East. It doesn’t work. I’m saying we can look at a lot of the discourse in bdsm culture and use it to examine submissive/dominant relationships and power negotiations in mainstream, every day life.
Rest assured, good men care and we are pissed off that Chris Brown won a Grammy. That award gave undeserved legitimacy to an unapologetic egomaniac with violent tendencies. His delusional fans only added insult to injury.
I was willing to forgive Chris Brown’s transgressions if he was truly sorry and became a changed person. Unfortunately, he is still the same arrogant, immature thug that beat up Rihanna. I was even willing to let the past stay in the past if Chris Brown faded into obscurity. Unfortunately, winning a Grammy made him once again relevant to pop music.
Todd in the Shadows, an online pop music reviewer, couldn’t contain his rage and created a Tumblr called “Trolling Chris Brown” to vent his frustration with other like minded individuals.
http://trollingchrisbrown.tumblr.com/
Is he the first Grammy winner with a penchant for violence and a criminal record? I think not.
If Teddy Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, and Yasir Arafat can win Nobel Peace Prizes, and if Hitler and Stalin can both be TIME Man of the Year, then hey, why not Chris Brown win a music award?
“I want to feel pity for these little social networking fools, some kind of sorrow for the world we’ve created that’s told these women that riding in Brown’s Lamborghini is worth having your mouth filled with blood occasionally.”
Who says it’s not worth it? I can think a million debasing and humiliating jobs that people go to every day because they want money. We all sacrifice our dignity and our health to some extent in order to get what we want out of life. I think Chris Brown sounds like a bad person, but I’m not so sure that these women are per se wrong for being willing to put up with pain and indignity in exchange for money and status.
This is not meant to exonerate Chris Brown in any way, nor to suggest that Rihanna was not a victim.
But, where do we put the fact that Rihanna has chosen to reconcile with him? She chose to sing duets with him and let him back in her life. Perhaps she did so in order to make more money. Perhaps she did so because she has self-esteem issues and/or has battered wife syndrome. Who knows? But she is not ONLY a victim and nothing else besides a victim. Her choices are also read as a message by younger people. Isn’t she sending a kind of message that says it’s okay for him to beat up a woman once and she’ll still stick by him?
It would be simple to reduce it all to attacker and victim, but Rihanna doesn’t seem to be doing that.
As bad as what Chris Brown did, this wasn’t (according to all the experts) DV, people continue to protray it as such and it wasn’t. It was a brutal assault to be sure. But there wasn’t a power inbalance here, this was a fight that got WAY WAY WAY out of hand.
“This is an interesting post, I think the Chris Brows/Rihanna thing is indicative of several problems in our society, and several fundamental misunderstandings which have lead to those problems. A few month or so ago there was a post on gmp about a recently released book which chronicled the pushy tactics of the PUA community. I came in part to the defense of that community, not entirely they have serious problems and I don’t endorse some of the more pushy tactics some PUA’s use or believe is appropriate to use.
Where am I going with this you might ask? At the end of that debate I suggested that there was no community of people helping men, particularly shy men learn how to attract women, someone replied to me saying yes there is and they pointed in part to the sex positive movement, and in part to some elements of the BDSM community. I did not reply, as that is true, those communities do exist! ”
What has BDSM and some sex positive communitys to do with PUA’s?
PUAs isnt only about sex. Its about changing yourself so you can fit in the social enviroment. Overcoming your own fear and fobias. Learning to interact with women so you can get the magic number. Sex may be the ultimate prize, just like the winning the olympics. But you attain this through hard work, not joining a bdsm club.
If you dont overcome your fears, you risk to be deficent even in a BDSM/general sexual enviroment.
Anyways in the BDSM milieu (ofcourse depends of the location) generally submissive guys are seen usually less than worthy and have almost a sub human status. I suggest to do some readings :
http://maybemaimed.com/2011/06/02/signal-boost-the-devaluation-of-male-submission/
Maymaym’s blog a 27 y old submissive guy who blogs about submissive guys in the femdom scene, and other BDSM topik related stuff.
There are problems in all social enviroments, as you say PUA’s are no exception, but neither are sex positive milieau’s.
Personally I dont accept destructive critics (not talking about you Chicago) feminism have problems, but they are the only or between the few who deals with women problems and status, and PUA’s even not problem free, they are the only or between the few (as you said) who help shy guys and socially incompetent people to become attractive and get women. So every movement/socio-cultural-politico movements has both pro and cons. It is easy to be destructive (all feminist suck and all PUAs are mysogynists) but at the end of the day they are still the only one (or one the few) who deals with their matter in question, so there are positive and negative elements in everything. Sorry for the OT wandering.
ciao
I’m a little confused as to what your disagreeing with me about.
“What has BDSM and some sex positive communitys to do with PUA’s?”
Well frankly not much, but as I said in my original post that was not my original point in fact it was a point someone else said to me which the rest of my comment addressed.
Anyway, despite viewing some aspects of PUA as overly simplistic and even too pushy I fully support the ethic of PUA and it’s existence, indeed it has helped me in my past. Furthermore I don’t believe that the BDSM community or any “sex-positive” community will truly help men at all. In fact the primary position of men in BDSM is subservient to women even when a man is playing in a position the “Domination” over women. This is because a core tenant of BDSM is the idea that everything that happens is a safe scene. In fact the truth is that as I see it BDSM is all about women being given a chance to play submissive for a few hours without any of the danger and or risks that taking the submissive role would really take. Now if this is good or bad is not something I really care about, it simply is a fact that it does not help men attract women in real life.
The BDSM community is about learning what you like, finding someone to do it with who is genuinely interested in it, and doing it together. Whatever that may be. for some it’s only in the bedroom, for others it is all the time. There are dominant men, and dominant women, and switches and people who are none of the above. So why would it be bad for a man who likes to dominate learn how to do so with consent? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say.. are you saying that it’s bad for people to get the excitement they crave without being abused? Or are you saying you think all women are naturally submissive in general? Because the former is disturbing, and the latter just isn’t true.
I can see how BDSM is not necessarily going to help shy guys get more assertive in terms of approaching women, as the PUAs might, but assertiveness and dominance are not the same thing. And a lot of women might like a dominant man in the bedroom but don’t want him dominating their life. There most definitely is a place for men who are neither doormats nor dominant, and that’s what most women want, but many are willing to settle for what they can find, or what they’ve been taught they are supposed to want, just as men are taught to be too far in either extreme. is it parents teaching us this? or is it society? or both?