Printer-friendly version
PDF version
Last week, I tuned into Channel 5 to watch the American Music Awards for the perfect ending to a quiet, lazy Monday. The award show was great, and Adam Lambert’s performance was getting quite the hype due to the release of his upcoming debut album. I knew how talented he was from his “American Idol” stint, yet what I saw when his act began made my jaw drop: a raunchier, male version of Lady GaGa. He pranced around on stage, thrusting his crotch into kneeling members of his entourage and kissed not only the women but also the men in his song “For Your Entertainment.” I couldn’t help but think his performance was a bad publicity exploit.
During past singing acts throughout the years, we’ve seen Madonna and Britney kiss, Eminem grab his goodies and Janet Jackson’s breast rebound — a “wardrobe malfunction.” Even before this generation of stars, celebrities have been known for pushing the sex envelope. Elvis’ 1956 gyrations on “The Ed Sullivan Show” certainly shook things up. As a kid in the ’90s, the most sexual icons were the Spice Girls — extremely mild by today’s standards. Pop icons — ample role models for today’s youth — are acting in despicable ways, and I am sure many could do a much better job of setting an example.
While I do think Lambert’s actions were far from excusable, it is not because of his preference for one gender over the other (Lambert’s red herring defense). According to the Huffington Post, Lambert believes his performance sparked such controversy because of his sexual orientation. He admits to getting carried away but is unwilling to offer any apology since he was just trying to “interpret the lyrics to his song.” If that was the case, maybe he should have picked a different song to perform — one that wasn’t so sexual.
I think gay prominence is great for our society, and personally, I would love to have a Will to my Grace, as long as my Will is not Lambert. Among his celebrity peers, he has been coined “Glambert” because of his edgy style consisting mainly of black nail polish, eyeliner and an intense swagger. As I watched his performance, I couldn’t help but think Lambert’s actions didn’t really matter; he was going to have the gay community backing him either way, purely because of his sexual orientation.
I remember seeing Janet Jackson perform in California after her mishap and seeing many members of the gay community rebel against the backlash she received with sayings like, “Chill out America, it’s just a boob.” While Jackson is considered an icon in the gay community, so is Lambert. But the fact that he prefers men to women does not justify the vulgar act. Actually, because he is gay, he should strive to set a respectable example for young, closeted gays in America. The model of vocational success as the penultimate criterion for “role models” is ready for revision.
This year, Lambert was named one of the sexiest men alive by People magazine. This performance was all too synchronized.
Lambert’s post-show to the American Music Awards was to be a stop on “Good Morning America.” After seeing his performance, the producers called to cancel his appearance. A spokeswoman for ABC said, “Given his controversial American Music Awards performance, we were concerned about airing similar content so early in the morning.” According to MTV, Lambert was quoted saying that the performance televised at the AMAs was not the “original choreography.” While it may have been improvised, he knew what he was doing, because the controversy behind his performance seems to be fueling record sales for his newest album. The stunt drew in a whopping 1,500 complaints, according to Rolling Stone magazine; it’s hard to believe he was simply getting caught up in the moment.
The trouble with these incidents, whether they are accidental or purposeful, is that adults are not the only viewers behind the television screens. If it were only adults watching, celebrity boob shocks and air humping would not need to be taken as seriously. It is not as if we are handing America’s youth a copy of Playboy while sitting in the sandbox: Primetime television isn’t somewhere you would necessarily expect to see these types of behaviors. The counter argument for children seeing Lambert’s risqué number is that the kids should have been asleep, but that argument casts blame where it should not be placed. It is blindingly apparent why kids would want to watch the American Music Awards simply because of Glambert. “American Idol” is a popular show that targets America’s youth. This audience tuned in to track the star’s professional growth. It does not matter if Lambert, or any other star for that matter, intends to or even wants to be a role model. The fact of the matter is that they wield celebrity; they command example and therefore should strive to exhibit model behavior to the young, adoring fans.
Hopefully, now that he knows what an impact he is capable of making, Lambert will think twice before rubbing his pelvis in his backup dancers’ faces. Other celebrities will begin to follow suit if we consumers of spectacle are willing to shun those who assist in the corruption of America’s youth. Sex is definitely a great sales technique if administrated to the right target market. It can only sell if we let it.
Paige Vigil welcomes comments at
Serving the University of Minnesota Community since 1900
12 Comments
To comment, please login.
Footloose Paige
Get over yourself, Paige. It's obvious by your Will and Grace comments you want gays in their place in society. Do you disapprove of blacks marrying whites as well? The world is not a convenient Will and Grace TV show. This comment alone is outrageously offensive and stereotypical.
Your double standard in not calling out raunchy straight artists makes you clearly a gay hater. Where is your profound sense of morality in those cases?
And if you have children watching the AMAs at 11 PM, after several other adult straight entertainers put on risque performances, then you are simply a BAD PARENT. No, an AWFUL PARENT. Other RESPONSIBLE adults should not have to worry about your larvae at 11PM on Sunday night. So please, leave the children out of it. At that hour, your kids are neither my concern, nor society's. You're right about one thing, they should have their tails in bed.
But even you, the upstanding journalist, Paige Vigil, encourage sexy immoral behavior at times:
Skankerella, racy Robin Hood & Whore White
"Yet, I have to be honest. It’s not just the women I dress for, it’s the men too; actually, let’s face it … it’s mostly the men. The opportunity to be stared at, nearly naked, whether you are single or in a monogamous relationship, is exhilarating. That extra attention lets us know that we are desirable, and on Halloween we get those desiring glances shamelessly."
Oh Paige, how can you be so immoral and moral at the same time?
So, with all the things you could write about, you chose to target a gay performer-- adding to a never ending dog-pile of moral do-gooders who secretly despise gay people.
In essence, you are the preacher in Footloose. You so desperately want to have fun, but you hate the fact that gay people can live open and equal lives. You're gonna have to get over that, Paige, the same way you manage to tolerate married interracial couples at the grocery store.
So, Paige, go back to your gay-hating morally self-righteous church and stick it. On the way, you better buy the DVD version of Will and Grace, because you obviously cannot handle the real world.
Or, like in Footloose, get over yourself, dance and enjoy the show (put the kids to bed first). Adam's song and performance was 'For Your Entertainment' after all.
Derek
I understand why you choose
I understand why you choose to use the example of Lambert's Idol status as a rationality for why this performance was inappropriate (“American Idol” is a popular show that targets America’s youth. This audience tuned in to track the star’s professional growth.).
However, I would like to argue that there are many ideological problems with the American Idol show. The show creates cookie cutters of people, and while someone genuinely fit the "nice guy" image that the show desperately seeks (and audience also seems to agree with) such as the the winner of Lambert's season seems to be, Kris Allen, other people are not like this image in their personal lives. Lambert is one of those people. Lambert was able to use the show to jump start his career, but the show also created a false image of Lambert. He realized the calculated risk of talking about his sexual orientation while the show was airing, a sign that Lambert was aware that his being gay could out-shadow this talent. He was out and conferable with being gay for many years, and after having to essentially closet himself in this prolonged introduction to America via Idol, he seems to making up for lost time.
I think you are right in pointing out that a major reason his performance caused so much controversy is that he is a recent American Idol alum, and he hasn't completely shed that skin yet (many people have since forgotten that Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood were on American Idol, however, is still on the heels of his season). So a huge audience still expects to see the tamer American Idol version of Lambert. Yet the likes of people like Lady Gaga and Christina Aguilera can do strange and/or provocative dances and it's for the most part not dwelled on by the public because it has become to be expected from these risque performers. Lambert is also a risque performer.
The audience did not expect this from Lambert.
In a way we are discussing two different versions of Lambert here; the American Idol Lambert, and the post-Idol "real" Lambert, the Lambert who used to be in underground LA show called The Zodiac where he wore load of glitters and performed songs with very sexual choreography. That is the Lambert we show on tv when people were expecting the other Lambert.
While I am still a bit conflicted about my option on the level of "appropriateness" of the performance, I do commend Lambert for not censoring himself (in essence letting himself be himself) and for shocking the public. Gay men come in all clothing brands, colors and sizes. Some are the Will type, as you mentioned. But others are the black eyeliner-wearing type like Lambert. So while he may not have helped the "closeted" boys by his performance he did show that being gay does not equal pretty designer clothing and/or a lisp.
Blame some of it on Idol's ideological problems. Blame some of it on America's high teen pregnancy rates yet disgust at seeing sexual displays on live television (through the abundance of sex on MTV and other cable channels seems to be just fine). But don't blame it all on Lambert.
I really have to disagree
I really have to disagree with your column on Adam Lambert. I watched the show, did you really? So, you were ok with "the Kids" watching Janet Jackson grab a male dancer's crotch, Lady Gaga break whiskey bottles while wearing a fake penis, Rhianna have guns on stage and being just about totally naked and all of Shrika's female dancers air humping? Adam Lambert's performance was on last--almost 11pm our central standard time here in MN--on a school night--kids should have been in bed. Parents need to be parents. Lambert didn't do anything more shocking than the other performers did who were on EARLIER. He is gay and you have a problem with that. I think it is a double standard. Why can't a gay man be sexual on stage? What are you so afraid of? Sex is not a bad thing.
Before you write Adam Lambert off as not Idol worthy, do a little research. He has been very active in fund raising for AIDS foundation benefits, and other charitable events. Recently, he help raise over $270,000 for public school KIDS arts/music programs. What have YOU or any of YOUR idols done? You know, he may not be to your moral liking, but you really should not judge a person's heart. He's a gifted vocalist and a very sweet person. He's MY idol.
Although crude, I really do
Although crude, I really do believe his performance would not be receiving the same kind of attention if it involved similar acts between a man and a woman. Apparently middle America is only willing to tolerate homosexuality as long as it conforms to predictable and non-threatening standards. Are people really so shocked? Pop music continuously pushes the boundaries of what middle America deems appropriate. If you think the kids don't deserve to see something like this, you need to take a look at the top videos on youtube. Every day a large part, if not the majority of the most popular youtube videos contain sexually charged material, and it is not just adults doing the watching.
So what?
Paige, what your article and subsequent comment fail to address is the "so what?" factor. So what if Lambert glorified sex at 11pm on an irrelevant awards show[*]? Ken Jennings dominated prime-time television for 74 episodes of Jeopary!, accruing fame and riches on account of his brains and wit, and still we have yet to be overtaken by intellectually-stimulated youth.
To use your own words, "think of the kids!!" is the red herring of moral conservatives who would rather dictate the media consumption of others than simply regulate theirs and their family's.
If the television is the arbiter of your children's value-consumption, that is your choice to make as a parent (though something tells me, Paige, that will not be your choice). If you want to hold your child to your own moral standards, then you need to be the one who serves as the artiber of their value consumption, so get in there and do it. Children who wish to seek out graphic images in the media aren't ever going to be sitting in front of the television watching ABC, waiting for a simulated sexual act - the real thing is on demand, at their fingertips, whenever they please.
If your children grow up with the idea that sex acts between consenting adults is fun, more than anything I'd say you managed to do something right.
So what?
[*] What hasn't been said yet, of course, is the larger crime that ABC aired several hours glorifying some of the worst "music" on the planet, going so far as to award people who committed the music to tape, and continues to stand behind its decision to expose millions of viewers to the likes of Lambert, Lady Gaga and Jennifer Lopez. Wait, what? I'm not allowed to dictate others' tastes? Shoot...
Just awful.
I have read a LOT of crappy editorials in the Daily, but this has to take the cake. Each of the comments above mine have said pretty much what I have to say, so I just have to ask how the Daily lets this stuff through. I mean, it isn't that I think Paige's opinion is wrong that bothers me, it's that her conclusions are poorly made and do not follow her logic. Is anyone in charge here?
Good for Lambert. If I had a gay or a straight kid, I would be pointing to Lambert and saying "see that? That man knows who he is and lives it 100%." And I would hope that the poor kid wouldn't let people like Paige here dictate his or her morality.
Designer Handbags
LV M95650 Louis Vuitton Suhali Le Majestueux Replica
[IMG]http://www.replica-shippe.com/images/authenticlv.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.replica-shippe.com/images/fakelv.jpg[/IMG]
This is a simple and practical bag. If you intend to buy a fake one, what you are supposed to care about is not if it looks as beautiful as authentic one or how stunning it
is but how close its leather and hardware collections to real bag’s. Fake purses This Luis
Vitton Suhali Le Majestueux bag suits business women for busy daily life or casual shopping. So its practicability and durability need good quality such as leather and details.
Replica Gucci Handbags I have bought some louis vutton coquettish knockoff bags
for evening parties then I totally ignored those fake bags’
Replica christian louboutin shoes quality because they are just showing bags and I did hold nothing heavy in it. I can accept as long as they had no big hole. But I
definitely will make sure this fake vitton suhali bag could have been more than 90% similarities to real one if I decided to buy it. Using and playing is totally different,
isn’t it? Fake Gucci pursesAfter my delicate comparison I had been sure that
this replica louis vitton suhali majestueux bag is worth to buy.
See the first one is authentic louis vuitton Suhali Le Majestueux and the other one is the fake louis vuitton handbag suhali I adore. Beside of exactly the same on dimension,
trimming and details, this fake louis vuitton suhali bag comes with advanced calf leather which gets most close to Suhali goat leather.
Designer Chanel Both of them are supple and durable leather. I have seen some bad quality knockoff suhali le bags with
rough and hard synthetic leather on which you can obviously see little dry tracks then check this knockoff suhali majestueux bag,
Fake Handbags
Fashion Handbags it has some glimmer which
means this calf leather is genuine calf skin with grease. You should tell bags’ leather in this way before your buying. Moreover this imitation louis vuitton suhali bag is
finished with golden brass hardware but not unpolished metals. It has sturdy collections.
I love this
replica louis vuitton handbags suhali Le Majestueux for its satisfactory quality and just 10% of original price. Buy through only 186$ .
Really exiting price ! Smaller one also avails. Replica handbag
Replica Gucci Handbags
Replica Handbags
Replica Chanel Handbags
Fake UGG Boots
Thanks
I really like this post , thanks for sharing
Regards, Vimax | Vigrx | Penis Enlargement Pills
Vigrx | Vimax | Vigrx | Prosolution Pills | Vigrx
replica handbags
Jacob & Co. Replica Watches less very (i.e., metaphorical replica Vacheron Constantin Overseas Chronograph Mens Watch 49150.B01A.9095 or poetic) rendering is replica Vacheron Constantin Patrimony Mens Watch 87172.000G-9301 appropriate.Some of this hostility," Chanel Replica Watches writes Miller, "has willingly fake swiss been generated by those Cartier Pasha Steel Grid Mens Watch W3105955 watch who stockpile to diagram high quality swiss the beginning accounts of replica swiss onset literally. ... introduction replica watches 2009 release was written guidance a replica Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra Diamond Ladies Watch 2563.75 prescientific age, money the insipidity of watches replica the time further sway watch replica an experiment to draw watch replica important truths to the watches replica kin of that promote. watches replica Those truths pick up watch replica leading whole the inclination watches replica that we are here watch replica along cover replete unlike watch replica know-how through the declaration best watches replica of the inventive command of providence. They obtain not get an header to illustrate science" fake watches past these opinions are Emporio Armani NZ144-A1392 rendered perhaps facade the Patek Philippe replica 1524 point of a biologists fake watches expertise, they nonetheless ruminate cheap Fake Zenith watch patterns of perception adopted Blue dial diamond hour markers Code: RD0151 - Men by plentiful who scrutinize Fake Ebel designer watches responsibly to reconcile avowal Replica Panerai Radiomir PM18303 besides reason, religion and ROLEX-W058 science. In conclusion, hole cheap Fake Sinn permits three planned observations marking qulity fake Bottega Veneta bags imaginative formulate. First, Kitzmiller Cartier replica handbags v. Dover is not Thomaswylde replica handbags the perdure lowdown on qulity fake Miumiu bags ID or on addition fake Hermes handbags versus friar surmise. existing fake Christian Dior handbags is symbol of the fake handbags on-going contention whereby the qulity Miumiu replica handbags governmental in that its fake bags actions also smooth elections fake Gucci bags itch strive to elude the Scylla again Charybdis of either fashion Rings for Her a government-enforced secularity or fake A Star is Born Diamond CZ Stud Earrings government-compelled religiosity. undoubted is fashion Cubic Zirconia Hoop Earrings not felicitous the job fake Champagne & Clear CZ Princess Cut Gold Tennis Bracelet of judges, aid of fashion CZ Birthstone Jewelry lore members, or mark designer jewelry out legislators; its the White Cultured Freshwater Pearl Stretch Bracelet online sales essential exhaustive citizens, individually designer jewelry and collectively, to cinch cheap Solitaire CZ Jewelry outlet our freedoms, including monastic fake Gold Diamond CZ Simple Eternity Band freedom, due to we fake tiffany burrow to educate the replica tiffany & co scheduled generation.While discretion of New Replica Tiffany & Co Necklaces tjewelrynecklaces155 religion does not lousy Tiffany & Co. 1837 lock charm bracelet leeway from religion, the New Replica Tiffany & Co Necklaces tjewelrynecklaces019 governments role is neither Tiffany & Co Earrings jewelry to uphold nor to Tiffany key Chains jewelry stop belief. Goldberg underscores replica tiffany jewelry considering us that the New Replica Tiffany & Co. Woven earrings "strength of real religion replica tiffany jewelry power America this day is not undercut by the side on
Yes, we have a good replicas
Yes, we have a good replicas watches , is such that it is so stick, we believe you will like it, the quality impeccable, and, most importantly, we have the perfect
after-sales service, yes, that is so perfect .
Cheers to the author for
Cheers to the author for giving me some solid ideas
Mark777,
brothels
hahahahahahatiffany
hahahahahahatiffany jewelry
Choose, buy and shop for on sale tiffany jewelry including Tiffany & Co Silver Necklace, Pendants, Bangles, Bracelets, Earrings, Rings and Accessories.
tiffany co
Tiffany Jewellery offering bangle Jewellery, bracelet jewelry, eardrop jewelry, necklace jewelry, ring jewelry, finger ring jewelry and earring jewelry
tiffany
tiffany and co
links of london
links london
Tiffany Style Silver Jewelry: Rings, Earrings, Necklaces, Bracelets and more Tiffany Jewellery at low prices.