Lady Gaga IS poisoning children's minds
By Bel Mooney
Last updated at 10:30 PM on 12th August 2010
Please don’t take it the wrong way when I tell you that it was Cliff Richard who introduced me to sex.
請不要攪錯方向當我告訴你，它是奇里夫李察向我介紹性愛。
In 1958, Cliff’s single Move It (described as ‘Britain’s first rock ’n’ roll record’ by John Lennon) topped the charts, and he visited Liverpool on tour — wiggling like Elvis in his shocking pink suit.
1958年，奇里夫的細碟移動它（被約翰連儂稱為'英國的第一隻搖滾樂唱片'）榮登音樂排行榜榜首，和他訪問利物浦巡演 - 在他的令人震驚的粉紅色西裝擺動得像貓王。
I have no illusions as to precisely why that was so exciting. How my friends and I screamed! I was 12 years old.
我沒有任何幻想，正為什麼那是非常興奮的，我的朋友和我如何尖叫起來！我只得12歲。
Queen of sleaze: Lady Gaga conveys nasty images of overt sexuality污穢女王：加加夫人傳達下流的性公開形象
That memory is an important reminder that the pop industry has always thrived on sexy rebellion.
那記憶是一項重要的提醒，流行音樂業已常在性感叛亂上蓬勃發展。
The fact that my father detested Cliff for his ‘jungle music’ made it all the more thrilling for me.
事實上是我的父親對奇里夫的'叢林音樂'厭惡，使它對我一切更加緊張刺激。
Why then do I sympathise with music mogul Mike Stock’s condemnation of the pornification of pop?
那為什麼我會同情音樂大亨邁克史托對流行pornification的譴責？
Because what was once rebellious is now mainstream and inescapable; what was once suggestive is now graphically explicit — and, most worryingly of all, it’s being aimed at a fan base that is getting younger and younger.
因為曾一度是反叛的現在是主流及不可避免;曾一度是挑動色情的現在是圖文並茂 - 而且，全部最令人擔憂的是，它是被針對一個越來越年輕化的粉絲基礎，。
Stock (one third of the legendary pop factory Stock, Aitken and Waterman) has publicly attacked pop culture for prematurely ‘sexualising’ today’s children.
史托（傳奇流行工廠的史托、艾特肯和沃特曼的三分之一）已公開抨擊流行歌文化為過早'性化'今天的兒童。
Inside view: Mike Stock - pictured here in his 80s hit-making heyday with colleagues Matt Aitken, centre, and Pete Waterman, right, - made stars of the likes of Kylie Minogue without resorting to overt sexualisation內部觀點：邁克史托 - 圖為80年代他的流行製造鼎盛時期，與同事麥特艾肯，中，皮特沃特曼，右， - 做出類似如凱莉米洛的明星，而不訴諸公開的性化
He believes it’s all gone too far: ‘These days you can’t watch modern stars — such as Britney Spears or Lady Gaga — with a two-year-old.
他相信它一切都走得太遠了：'這些日子裡，你不能觀看現代明星 - 如布蘭妮斯皮爾斯或加加夫人 - 與一個 2歲大的。
'Now, 99 per cent of the charts is R&B and 99 per cent of that is pornography.’
現在，榜上百分之99的是R＆B，和它的百分之99是色情。
If an ordinary person came out with a statement like that the critics would be quick to sneer about ‘moral panic’.
如果一個普通人推出一項像那樣批評的聲明，將會很快對'道德恐慌'嗤之以鼻。
If you dare to challenge the ‘anything goes’ conventions of our society you get dismissed as a prude.
如果你敢挑戰我們'怎麼都行'的社會公約，你會被貶為放不開。
But Stock is the man who launched the career of Kylie Minogue and has made his fortune from the business he’s condemning.
但史托是男人他開發凱莉米洛的職業生涯，並從他譴責的事業取得他的財富。
Even then, he obviously feels he has to defend himself in advance by adding: ‘It’s not about me being old-fashioned. It’s about keeping values that are important in the modern world.’
即使是這樣，他顯然感到他要事先辯護自己，故補充：'它不是因為我守舊，它是關於保持在現代世界的重要價值觀。
Can it really be as bad as he claims?
它難道真是像他所說的那樣差？
People like me don’t sit around watching pop videos because there’s no time, and anyway, they’re hardly aimed at my generation.
像我這樣的人不會坐在那裡觀看流行歌影片，因為沒有時間，及無論如何，他們幾乎沒有針對我那一代。
But it’s the generation they are aimed that has caused Stock’s alarm.
但它是他們被針對的那一代，已導致史托的警報。
I wrote an article about going to a Pussycat Dolls/Rihanna concert at Wembley in 2006, when I was amazed at the vast number of children in the audience.
Thrusting dancers: 'The Pussycat Dolls concert I attended It was a Sunday night in school term time and no place for children, let alone toddlers'魄力舞者：'我出席的貓咪玩偶音樂會，它是在學期時間的一個星期天晚上，沒有給兒童的地方，更遑論幼兒'
They’d been taken by their parents to see an adult show full of pumping music and thrusting dancers: raunch from start to finish.
It was a Sunday night in school term time. No place for children, let alone toddlers.
With that experience in mind, I knew what to expect yesterday when — to investigate Stock’s claims — I settled down to watch a series of Lady Gaga videos on YouTube.
But even I was taken aback by the relentlessness of the imagery — not just sexual, but cruel, too.
The undertones of violence are as obvious as the sex.
No Romance: Gaga's videos included bondage and grotesque sexual violence, but Cher, pictured on the right in 1992, and Madonna were the mothers of pop-porn沒有浪漫：加加的影片包括奴役和怪異性暴力，但雪兒，圖右側於 1992年，及麥當娜是流行色情的母親
Bad Romance contains bondage and grotesque sexual violence; Paparazzi is particularly tasteless with its references to death and disability; while Alejandro is full of jackboots, bondage and menace — culminating in a hideous gang-attack/rape on a nun-type figure.
I don’t deny the theatrical impact or the professionalism of the product. No matter that the choreography is repetitive — all crotch-clutching, writhing and open-mouthed suggestiveness.
No matter that the male dancers have to be tattooed to get the job — this is, after all, rough trade.
No matter that the mesmeric electro-beat is synthetic to a point of mind-numbing tedium.
No matter that the lyrics reach depths such as: ‘Let’s have some fun, this beat is sick/I wanna take a ride on your disco stick.’
The point is Lady Gaga has sold more than 15 million albums and 40 million singles worldwide. She’s a phenomenon — who knows that she must up the ante all the time in order to go on selling.
Even if it means launching yourself into a festival crowd wearing nothing but a fishnet body suit and a pair of tiny knickers, not caring who grabs you.
Sleaze and Gaga are two sides of the same coin, which wouldn’t matter if all this took place between consenting adults.
But any eight-year-old can watch this stuff on the TV or computer — and they do.
‘Mothers of young children are worried because you can’t control the TV remote control,’ says Mike Stock.
‘Before children even step into school they have all these images — the pop videos and computer games, such as Grand Theft Auto — confronting them, and the parents can’t control it.’
Pop music has always used subtle sexual innuendo, but once it wasn’t de rigueur.
Shock value: Britney Spears and Madonna shared an infamous kiss at the MTV awards, as performers seek ever more explicit ways to impact on audiences價值衝擊：布蘭妮斯皮爾斯和麥當娜在MTV大獎共享一臭名昭著的吻，當表演者尋求更明確的方式來影響受眾
Now raunchy R&B and hip-hop seem to have a stranglehold on the market, so that what used to be edgy and extreme is now the commercial mainstream.
One of the results is that female singers are happy to flog themselves as sex objects.
Cher probably started it 20 years ago with the video for If I Could Turn Back Time being briefly banned on MTV because of her outrageous outfit.
Today, a minute black leather thong, buttock tattoo, fishnets and leather jacket wouldn’t turn a hair. Cher and Madonna were the ‘mothers’ of this pop-porn chic.
But how sad that nowadays if you’re a pop star (with some honourable exceptions such as Leona Lewis) you feel you have to ape the clothes and gestures of the downmarket glamour model — the cheaper the better.
Female singers seem to think that the only way to sell their albums is to flash their gussets, while looking mean, vacant and up for it.
Cheryl Cole could look beautiful in a bin liner so why does she stoop to degradation?
Even Cheryl Cole (the most sexy woman in the world, according to the men’s magazine FHM) chose to perform on The X Factor wearing boots and bizarre side-split trousers that showed her knickers. Did she need to? No. Cheryl Cole would look beautiful in a boiler suit.
But such porn-fashion infects the majority of pop videos — from Katy Perry’s wide-eyed suggestiveness to Britney Spears’s tired old sleaze.
And therefore it’s on the High Street.
The costumes familiar from pop videos have become (more or less) what every teen wants to wear on a Saturday night out.
Make no mistake, many young girls (and women) believe the only way to look attractive is to look sexy, and to look sexy you have to look trashy.
It’s a short step from that to behaving like, well, trash. That’s a word I intensely dislike (unless applied to the contents of the dustbin), but I use it deliberately.
Sadly, many young women don’t value themselves much higher.
The messages they receive through the screen as children affect their behaviour — and anyone who suggests they don’t is ignorant of the power of advertising and the market.
Last year, a survey published in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine found that teenagers who preferred pop songs with degrading sexual references were more likely to become sexually active.
Note that the emphasis was on ‘degrading’ lyrics — which is a world away from the love (and longing) traditionally associated with pop music, as well as the naughty innuendo of Chuck Berry’s complaint, ‘I couldn’t unfasten her safety belt’ in his 1964 hit No Particular Place To Go.
The research concluded that exposure to raunchy sex in the media could certainly be a risk factor, encouraging young people to experiment sexually at a young age.
I have no doubt that those who defend the ‘message’ of Lady Gaga and the raunchy pop sisterhood will say that their videos make them look ‘powerful.’
After all, a woman made tall by platform boots, dressed in a sci-fi outfit and strutting her stuff can look as if she could rule the world.
But that’s an illusion. The artistes are controlled by a powerful management who know this is all about sexuality — while Cheryl Cole, left, joins in with the over-exposure selling an image.
A powerful female image? Or is this sexual imagery simply a demand of record company executives一個強大的女性形象？抑或這是否只純是一性感形象唱片公司高管要求的
And the image, handed down to ordinary young girls, is that of a very easy conquest.
That message is, I’m afraid, reflected in too many statistics to bore you with here.
A shocking number of young people are so accustomed to all the varieties of porn (the real stuff as well as its fashionable pop-culture spin-off) they carry its conventions through into their own behaviour.
Boys expect certain sexual ‘services’ from their girlfriends that were once the province of prostitutes. And the girls feel they have to comply — or seem hopelessly strait-laced. It’s nasty.
If you have any doubts about the degrading message of popular pop videos you should look at the No 4 in the charts, Love The Way You Lie by Eminem with Rihanna. This song is an overt glamorisation of domestic violence.
The video shows a beautiful girl and a rough-looking guy locked into a destructive relationship, hitting each other, making up with lingering kisses, only to resort to aggression once more.
The ‘dialogue’ between the two singers is disturbing. What effect will it have on impressionable minds of both genders?
Lady Gaga crowd surfs at Lollapalooza Festival in Chicago, seemingly not caring who gropes her加加夫人在芝加哥洛拉帕羅扎節作人群衝浪，似乎不關心誰搏她懵
Eminem epitomises the inarticulate, violent, macho frustration of a certain kind of man who thinks he owns his woman — and will certainly show her who is boss.
He sings: ‘If she ever tries to f****** leave again/I’mma tie her to the bed and set the house on fire.’
Then Rihanna comes in with her chorus (background of flames, by the way) that responds to this aggression with: ‘That’s all right — because I like the way it hurts.’
It’s mind-boggling that a woman who was beaten up by her former boyfriend, the rapper Chris Brown, should agree to justify a woman’s victimisation. But then she does like to pose with devil’s horns on her head.
The message to girls is —– ‘Yes, he owns you and will lie to you and treat you bad, but you put up with it because you like it. Or you’ll be in trouble.’
And this is all being ‘sold’ to the fans by means of a beautifully produced video, employing the obvious talents of designers and filmmakers alike.
What a criminal waste. It’s not a message I want any girls to hear.
Nor do I want boys to admire Snoop Dogg’s revolting sexual bragging on Gangsta Luv — to name just one of many similar tracks.
Like Mike Stock, I wish we could turn back the clock to the time when Elvis’s fully-clothed wiggle changed the history of popular music for ever. But of course, that’s impossible.
Yet I applaud this one man with influence in the music business for speaking out.
For the rest — well, I wish that the producers of music videos would realise that ‘restraint’ is not a dirty word and that selling everything by means of the nastiest sexual message has a long-term corrupting effect on the next generation.
They won’t, of course. But just don’t tell me that doesn’t matter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1302594/Lady-Gaga-IS-poisoning-childrens-minds.html
Lady Gaga - 光明會木偶
Lady Gaga的“電話”中的隱藏意思
Lady Gaga的 “Alejandro”: 神秘學意義
Kanye West’的“權力”：它的符號的神秘意義
加加夫人 = 光明會控制媒體的武器 (音)
加加的香水據聞將嗅似“血和精液“
加加夫人，一位演藝事業的殉道者
沒有留言:
發佈留言