Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think women writhing around in suspenders and stockings is...

640 replies

hatwoman · 11/12/2010 20:52

...not really family viewing? I've barely watched x-factor in my life but I had thought everyone said that, for all its faults, it was something that had got families watching telly together. I was expecting wholesome boy bands and gutsy young girls. Clearly I'm naive and a prude.

OP posts:
HerBeatitude · 11/12/2010 21:44

"They are pop stars FFS - it's in their job description to show flesh!"

So where were Robbie's pecs? Why were wand erection not wearing just their underpants?

Guacamohohohole · 11/12/2010 21:44

I couldn't agree more and I'm going to complain to OfCom... I think their clothing (lack of) was inappropriate and their dancing was provocative and bordering on soft porn. Not what I would expect pre 9pm on a Saturday night on a family show.

MsSparkle · 11/12/2010 21:44

You are ignorant because you know nothing about Christina clearly.

amijee · 11/12/2010 21:45

Enrique, Robbie, Timberlake...they have all been in music videos wearing very little.

It's not just the women that feel they need to sexualise themselves to attract audiences.

HerBeatitude · 11/12/2010 21:45

"What exactly is bothering people - the flesh? the suspenders? the gyrating?"

The inequality of treatment of female artists and male artists.

HTH.

DuelingFanio · 11/12/2010 21:45

"do you just feel you have to be shocked cos you all have kids."

I don't have kids yet.

I just wonder where the strong normal female role-models are. Why does being a pop star mean taking your clothes off?

detachandtrustyourself · 11/12/2010 21:45

wasn't paying much attention but shocked to catch sight of it, think the girating was the worst bit. Carry on films were just as rude though.

byrel · 11/12/2010 21:45

Talk about overreaction of the year, it was hardly x-rated was it

TheCrackFox · 11/12/2010 21:45

I know enough to know that she could have put more clothes on and saved the stripper act for a later show.

Ladyofthehousespeaking · 11/12/2010 21:45

Mssparkle- you are so right

noonar · 11/12/2010 21:45

i mean, you may well object to this on feminist grounds too. be my guest. but my main point here is about exposing our children to this.

BeenBeta · 11/12/2010 21:46

It seems the reason Christina Aguilera was on X factor was to publicise the new soon to be released film called Burlesue.

On the Odeon website it says it is rated 12A.

Hence, given that rating, I suspect what we have just seen on TV was deemed appropriate for early evening viewing before 9.00 pm.

My DSs age 10 and 8 years old were in bed thankfully but only by chance as they have to get up early tomorrow or we would have normaly let them stay up to watch the final.

HerBeatitude · 11/12/2010 21:46

But not on the X Factor before the watershed. Videos have ratings. The X factor is broadcast family viewing.

MollieO · 11/12/2010 21:47

I don't watch X factor so have just had a look at youtube. If I'd been watching with an under 10 child it would have been turned off. I don't see why the dancers could have worn something like CA was wearing. Instead it seemed to be how little could they wear and get away with it.

Madonna wasn't doing performances like that on pre-watershed programmes on mainstream 25 yrs ago and even her videos on MTV got censored.

MsSparkle · 11/12/2010 21:48

Ladyofthehousespeaking reading through it seems you do know something about Christina and your not just putting all singers in the same boat so to speakSmile

Kaloki · 11/12/2010 21:50

"I just wonder where the strong normal female role-models are. Why does being a pop star mean taking your clothes off?"

Conversely, why can't a woman be a strong role model without being fully covered up?

MsSparkle · 11/12/2010 21:50

"Madonna wasn't doing performances like that on pre-watershed programmes on mainstream 25 yrs ago and even her videos on MTV got censored."

Well yes and i am glad we have moved on from those days where sex a taboo subject.

Ormirian · 11/12/2010 21:51

Nah! It's empowering.Just let your DDs watch it and they too can grow up to be strong independent women in charge of their own sexuality.

Or so I'm told

Hmm
TheCrackFox · 11/12/2010 21:51

Anyway, Christina's last album bombed and she had to cancel her last tour due to lack of sales. She is clearly a desperate hasbeen.

Ladyofthehousespeaking · 11/12/2010 21:51

Mssparkle- I do- I actually think she's very inspirational, she escaped from a terrible situation and has survived where others (britney etc etc) have gotten swallowed into all sorts of terrible business.

tabouleh · 11/12/2010 21:52

amijee no it is not prudish - I don't think that anyone is saying that this type of performance should be banned - it is more about is being pre-watershed on a family entertainment show.

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100418065544/www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/Sexualisation-of-young-people2835.pdf?view=Binary" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Quote from Linda Papadopoulos review into the sexualisation of young people.

___

Advertising doesn?t just sell products; it sells aspirations and identities.

The proliferation and accessibility of advertising images and messages make it increasingly difficult to target them at the
appropriate audience. With the advent of mobile internet, it is almost impossible to
guarantee that messages are only being seen by the age group for which they are intended. There is no ?watershed? on the internet, and many adverts are sent indiscriminately to mobile phones and e-mail addresses. A child with a mobile phone literally has access to pornography in their pocket.

With proliferation and accessibility come
normalisation. From the café culture of lap dancing clubs, to push up bras for 8-year-olds, we?ve reached a point where it?s seemingly acceptable to use photographs of barely clad actresses and models, along with sexually explicit strap lines, on the covers of mainstream magazines and stock them alongside the comics in high street newsagents. High street stores sell video games where the player can beat up prostitutes with bats and steal from them in order to facilitate game progression.

The message is clear ? young girls should do whatever it takes to be desired. For boys the message is just as clear: be hyper-masculine and relate to girls as objects. It?s no surprise therefore that when researchers examine the content of young girls? web pages they find young teens are posting sexually explicit images of themselves on social networking sites, and self-regulating each other with sexist, derogatory and demeaning language.

As images that would have been found shocking just a few years ago flood the mainstream, so the boundaries get pushed back further. We?re seeing adverts that reference gang rape and adverts where women are reduced to dismembered body parts. In fact the influences of the iconic visual constructs of porn are contributing to the emergence of a caricature of what it means to be a woman.

Being beautiful,being attractive, being ?sexy? is no longer about individuality and the characteristics that make a person unique, it?s about ticking off items on a checklist: big breasts,big lips, fake tan, fake hair, fake nails ? and,of course, youth.

The notion that all young women who are socialised into believing that their worth lies in their sexuality and appearance should have the ?agency? to stand up to these images is naïve. This assumes that: firstly, all these messages are assimilated on a conscious level so can easily be challenged; secondly,that all young women are afforded the opportunity to moderate these messages through healthy parental and peer relationships; thirdly, that their own selfesteem is resilient enough to allow them
to question and stand up to prevailing norms; and finally, that their education has
afforded them the kind of media literacy
that allows them to ?filter out? unhealthy
messages.

The fact is that many young people don?t have these opportunities and, as such, are vulnerable to the messages both overt and covert that are propagated in the world around them. With a tendency to ?adultify?
children and ?infantilise? women, the lines where childhood ends and adulthood begins are becoming increasingly blurred. Girls who haven?t even developed secondary sex
characteristics are posed to look overtly
sexy, while adult women are posed to look submissive and child-like rather than empowered and in control. It?s no surprise therefore that for young female actors and musicians, taking their clothes off has become a rite of passage, a way of showing the world that they?re ?all grown up now?.

While boys are ?allowed? to enter adulthood without needing to advertise their sexual availability or desirability, they are nevertheless exposed to messages that reinforce the idea that they should be primarily motivated by sex and that male desire is something that cannot be controlled. This is having an impact both on boys? attitudes to their own bodies and on their attitudes to and behaviour towards girls.

_

The review was commissioned by the last Government but has been shelved and the new review commissioned recently is much much narrower. Sad

lillybloom · 11/12/2010 21:52

I completely agree that it was inappropriate for the time and target audience. I will be complaining. Its not about being a prude its about my dc getting a childhood without being sexualised.

detachandtrustyourself · 11/12/2010 21:52

well barbara windsor with the hearts stuck on her nipples was. But I don't remember girating. The girating was shocking on x factor tonight. If mtv videos are bad as well, that's shocking too. What's wrong with just nice clothes. Come back bananarama.

notjustapotforsoup · 11/12/2010 21:53

The fighting on the feminism boards is nothing that AIBU doesn't see on an hourly basis. And only exists because idiots the uninformed go in there hoping to show women what's what.

This is exactly what is discussed on a regular basis - the objectification of women and the normalisation of porn culture. If you don't like it, then get on board. It's not about being prudish, it's about female performers feeling the need to strip off to be noticed. At least X Factor has resisted that with their female contestants, although the Wagner horror show is another matter.

HerBeatitude · 11/12/2010 21:54

Oh FFS sex wasn't a taboo subject then.

It just wasn't considered suitable viewing for 8 year olds.

The backlash against women's emancipation hadn't kicked in quite so strongly and the pornification of our culture hadn't begun.

Little girls are being groomed to know that their intrinsic value lies in their attractiveness to men and everything else is secondary. It is fucking disgusting.