Women singers singing in their knickers.

[Thelasthurdle]

I admit I'm older generation.
I'm a great admirer of singers such as Nina Simone, Linda Ronstadt, Suzi Quatro, Christine Perfect, Joan Baez, Tracy Chapman etc, etc.
They all not only have great voices but also real musical talent.
And they also don't stand and sing in their knickers
So what is it with people like Beyonce and Rhianna? If they really are talented why do they need to sing in their knickers? Why do they need to use sex to sell their songs? They are powerful enough not to bend to the industry pressure on them. Why not stand or fall on their talents rather than on selling their sexuality.?

To make more money.

Both Rihanna and Beyoncé are very rich.

Suzi Quattro used to wear skin tight black leather top and bottoms and a deep plunge neckline with a vast cleavage.

I love when women express their sexuality 😭

But agree that sex sells

But there's also a growing movement of female singers who hate the ones showing off their bodies, maybe you'll like them? 😄

Did it start with Madonna?

Madonna started it 😬

Sorry, did you write this thread in 2006 and forget to post it?

Jinx lol

Who cares - their body, their choice. Some women like showing off their bodies.

Usher always gets his chest out. Maroon 5 main guy was topless for his entire performance at the superbowl.

Yet neither faced criticism.

Also why are you mentioning Rihanna? She has not performed in years properly and her one ofd superbowl show she wore a head to toe red jumpsuit.

I know what she wore.
And what she wore was possibly what a lot of the women in her audience were wearing.

I do remember back in the 80s when Hazel O'connor sang on TOTP wearing a black bra and feeling shocked that she was allowed to do that.

The type of show that Nina Simone, Linda Ronstadt, Suzi Quatro, Christine Perfect, Joan Baez or Tracy Chapman are putting on is very different to the incredibly active and dancey, fashion forward spectaculars that Rihanna and Beyoncé put on. They could hardly dance around in a pair of jeans and an oversized corduroy shirt.

Huh what’s that got to do with your post OP so if you know what she was wearing then you must also know she sold herself somewhat on her sexuality, wasn’t that your point. Yknow maybe the women in Beyoncé’s audience are wearing knickers. If that’s your argument.

Did you faint when you saw Madonna doing like a Virgin.

No, it started way back even before burlesque probably

Freddie Mercury should really have worn a nice, freshly ironed shirt and a tank top knitted by his Mummy. I can't even mention the trousers.

Likewise, W. Axl Rose would have looked much better in a pair of beige chinos and a navy blue blazer. Whatever possesed Slash with that hat is anybody's guess.

I have always found it a bit odd.
To my mind, it's different from the Suzy Quattro skin tight/cleavage/lots of leg look because it's still clothes.
The others are just… knickers, and cutaway at that, to show as much groin/bum cheek as possible, as are the dances they do.

Some of the male rock stars used to wear tight jeans that left little to the imagination, and bare chests and so forth. I also remember Axl Rose in his tight little red shorts and Iggy Pop in transparent jeans.
Do the young men just sing in their pants now, too?

I also have a nagging feeling that the really good singers don't need to sing in their knickers.

Well to me if you feel people will only listen to your music if you are wearing a pair of knickers when you sing it says more about your lack of confidence in your musical talent than about your fashion choices.
It makes the woman singers look as though they are being manipulated by the industry and the desperation for celebrity. Not that they are actually making a statement about themselves.

Ah! We cross posted!

It really didn't. Female singers have been using sexuality to sell records for as long as there has been pop music.

From Suzie Quatro in her leather catsuits to Dusty Springfield in minidresses. The fashions may have changed but the use of "shocking" clothing to sell records is not new.

I don't think Suzi did sell herself on her sexuality. She sold herself as being " one of the boys"

No need to be sarky! At the time it wasn't the norm for a female singer to be showing underwear.

What are knickers if not clothes?

As for male stars - did you see what Benson Boone wore for his Grammy’s performance? And he’s not even edgy, he’s pure mum pop.

Why does performing in your knickers mean you're not confident in your singing ability? Why can't you show off both?

There are thousands of wannabes in the music industry who could look fantastic dancing around in their knickers with no singing talent. But they're not making millions, are they. So logically the ones who are making millions dancing in their knickers are also offering something more, that being singing talent and general charisma/"it factor".

Sabrina Carpenter or Beyoncé look great in their pants but no one is pretending they're literally the sexiest women in the world. So they're clearly offering more than just the sex appeal.

Youre also not comparing like with like. Being a pop star isn’t purely about being good at singing, it’s about the all round package- singing, dancing, charisma, sex appeal. The artists you list weren’t pop stars, they were “just” singers and thus they just sang rather than doing what pop stars do. Plenty of equivalents exist to those artists (Adele, Florence and the Machine), but it’s silly to compare artists of a different kind entirely.

Really, you think, well Elvis in his black leather 1968 comeback was definitely selling his sexuality and why not, he was absolutely fucking gorgeous Alvin Stardust tried, not so much success.

Ha ha, sorry.