Thank You

But Lindsay Lohan's personal problems, whatever they may be, are not the true issue here. She's 23-years-old and being ripped to shreds in the press mostly because she goes out at night. That's what the media is really focused on. With all the boozing on college campuses, after-work happy hours and box-wine toting moms, why do we have a problem with this one young woman staying out late (and possibly having a cocktail)?

I'm not saying that Lindsay doesn't have issues. She might. But her biggest issue is her unfair treatment by the tabloids, entertainment shows and TMZs of the world. Consider Shia La Beouf, who is also 23 years old. He started his comedy career when he was 10, and, like Lindsay, was a Disney property, starring in Even Stevens and Holes before he turned 18. Transformers is one of the top-grossing films of the decade. And yet: Shia has been arrested for criminal trespassing (at a Walgreens) and he has a metal plates and screws in his hand thanks to crashing a car after drinking. Even though the accident was not his fault, the officers at the scene smelled booze on Shia's breath, and he has a knuckle he will "never be able to move again."

While these are two different people in two different situations, Shia is never on the cover of a tabloid with the words "rock bottom" printed in giant yellow letters. Like Britney before her, Lindsay has become America's favorite person to complain about, feel sorry for, make fun of and tear down. It seems like everyone has an idea of how a young woman is "supposed" to behave. If she doesn't comply? Anger and vitriol and mockery. When Leonardo DiCaprio was drinking, hanging with models and out every night with his "pussy posse", no one claimed he'd hit rock bottom.

The point is: Lindsay's living her life, working out her issues, but at this point, she can't even try to to something right — make a documentary in India; design for Ungaro — without being eviscerated, judged, ridiculed and trashed. It seems like we expect certain things of our little girls, even when they're not so little anymore. Maybe we're angry that they've grown up, or that they're not the things we hoped for… But our expectations should not be their concern. Lindsay should only have to be and do the things she hopes for.

--"In Defense of Lindsay Lohan"

Yo go, girl. Jezebel is on a roll. Lindsay, I still love ya.

On Rihanna and Chris Brown

I’ve been following the Chris Brown-Rihanna story, reading every MTV news article, and every “new” story that hits Google News, even though most of the information rarely changed. I always figured a photo would leak out; it’s inevitable in this day and age.

I’ve thought about reposting the image, but decided against it. It’s too harsh, and there are plenty of other sources that show it. People have said that the image will win her sympathy points (there is always a cynicism factor to any story), which seems like an obvious duh. Very rarely, if ever, images of beaten women inspire glee.

Are Rihanna’s eyes closed because she is in pain (they were “punched” close), or is she closing them out of sadness, pain, and sensitivity?

I admit to my own voyeurism in regard to this story. I would like details, a reconstruction of the fight, of their relationship troubles. Completely none of my business, and I respect Rihanna’s decision to keep as quite and private as she needs to. I cannot fathom everything she’s going through, knowing that despite just dealing with her complex feelings for Brown, the physical and emotional hardship of what just happened on the eve of what would have been a momentous night, and a police investigation and possible case, she has to think about her career, her image, and how she can react publicly. The pressure! When to speak out, what to say. Does she address it in her music? Does she become the face of domestic violence?

There are a lot of people out there who do want her to take a hard stand, to go out there and speak against domestic violence. And I applaud her and encourage her to do so—when and if she feels she can tackle it. She shouldn’t be forced to do anything; if she wants to speak out, it should be on her terms.

I have read rumors that if she goes back to Chris Brown, then people will lose respect for her. I understand this reaction, and I think that disappointment will follow as well. She’ll be under so much pressure to completely cut him out of her life—not only from anyone who didn’t like the two of them together, but for all the people who worry about her image and the effect this will have on her career. It’s awful to think so strategically about personal decisions, isn’t it? To worry about how every little thing you do will look to others, how it will be interpreted, if you’re sending an appropriate message, or if you’re cutting off your foot?

Alas, that’s how Brown’s career has been seen the past two weeks. Golden R&B star is no more. I’ve read accounts that say he’s career is forever down the toilet—eh, the right combination of circumstances can turn it around. Might not happen, might not happen for a long time, but it’s possible.

It was heartening to see both Kanye West and Jay-Z—two major hip-hop figures—speak out in horror regarding the incident and their love for Rihanna. Jay-Z was a mentor to Rihanna, and opened up “Umbrella”, her 2007 smash that kick-started Good Girl Gone Bad’s hold on America, as well as a target of nasty rumors involving the two of them.

I support whatever Rihanna decides to do. I hope that she doesn’t end her career over this, not that I believe that will happen. I’d like to see this whole crisis addressed somewhat on her next album, even if it doesn’t arrive for a few years.

Although Rihanna’s star was very, very high, she was heading for a vacation. Called the “queen of the summer”, Rihanna has become of the biggest stars of this decade by consistently releasing hits, summer after summer. The last four summers—yes, the last four—were dominated by, respectively, “Pon de Replay”, a cheesy dancehall song that virtually everyone, including myself, dismissed; “SOS”, the new “Crazy in Love” that borrowed “Tainted Love”’s famous hook; “Umbrella”, which took her to new heights; and “Disturbia”, the going-crazy song that was unfortunately penned by Chris Brown. Good Girl Gone Bad was rereleased last year with additional songs, including “Disturbia”, yielding eight singles, a massive number for any artist; the album is done. She would have laid low anyway, relaxing or working on her next album.

That next album, rumored to be released sometime in late 2009, was supposed to follow in the steps of “Disturbia” and her harder, edgier, kicking-ass-and-going-slightly-crazy songs, a move I am totally for and one that fits well with her and even what she is experiencing now.

But that is the subject of another post.

Beyoncé, Don't Be Hatin'

Oh, Beyoncé .

For a long time, Beyoncé was my girl. I knew I shouldn't like her thanks to all the Destiny's Child hijinks back in the early years of this decade, but damn, that girl knew how to deliver hits. And she was so professional, so poised and just so great. "Crazy in Love" didn't start to get old until last year, that's how good it was.

A guy I know once noted that all Beyoncé/Destiny's Child songs are about how their men have screwed them--and while they do have positive songs about men, they're few and far between and are usually not the singles. It's funny that Beyoncé is still singing these songs, because she's married now to her beau of six years, Jay-Z. "Crazy in Love", after all, like many of the songs on her multiplatinum Dangerously in Love, is about him.

Beyoncé has a new album coming out November 18. Her obvious competition now is Rihanna, who, thanks to her glut of singles the past few years, will soon be taking a break. Beyoncé's done the curious thing and released two single simultaneously, one for R&B/urban radio and one for the pop audience. It's kind of an odd strategy--I'm not in favor of rushing singles, as I feel they can cannibalize one another and shorten the album's lifespan. Both singles--one a ballad, the other a club jam--will inevitably be compared to one another, fighting it out for greater prominence.

Both singles are lacking, but "Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)" edges out "If I Were a Boy" just by its sheer danceability. "If I Were a Boy" drags. Both songs share thematic similarities--both men screwed up badly and she's gone for good. A DJ on the radio, introducing "Single Ladies", called it the song that all the girls are going to go wild for in the club, and it's meant for that with its calling of "All the single ladies (repeat) / Now put your hands up" in the opening. Who knew women were clamoring for a song about being dumped because their man wouldn't marry them!

"Single" is a term that can mean two things: a person is not married, or they are not in a relationship. It's generally meant as the latter, but here she uses the census definition. Like many “single” songs, the girl has just broke it off with her man, and is all about having fun with her friends. This sentiment is seen in Pink's extremely frank "So What" and in many Destiny's Child/Beyoncé songs. It's a true enough feeling, one that seems to get too much airplay, but ok.

But where I object is the overt message of the song, that in order for the man to keep her, he should have put a ring on it. It's also noteworthy that the lyric is "If you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it"--not her, not me, not my finger, not my love. What is this it? Sex? Companionship? The relationship? Her? I guess it is easier to rhyme with (although it only rhymes with it here, so it's a poor excuse). Why?

The problem also with celebrity is that we know Beyoncé got her man, she got her ring. She won, essentially, if that's the game you're playing. So she’s saying that if you want to get married and the guy doesn't, if he's not ready for that commitment, then throw him to the wind--he's not treating you right. She "cried her tears, for three good years"--either waiting for him or putting up with him, and now she's done.

What's fascinating is that apparently Beyoncé is not that type of girl. She didn't want an engagement ring. So why--if she considers herself untraditional--does she espouse such retroactive thinking in her music? "Single Ladies" does sound very much like her last single (also only sent to R&B/urban markets), "Get Me Bodied", a favorite of mine. She's talked about her multiple personalities through her music, especially her wild and crazy stage persona Sasha, and "Single Ladies" is very Sasha.

"If I Were a Boy" is her imagining of what it would be like to be a boy. This sentiment has also been expressed before (but what hasn't in popular music?), recently in Ciara's “Like a Boy”, even reminding me of Madonna's "What It Feels Like for a Girl" (album version). “If I Were a Boy” really only works with the music video—again featuring a lyin’, cheatin’ boyfriend. Seriously B, one gets the idea from your music that you’re married to one hell of a loser if that’s all you sing about. Beyoncé has two love interests, one black and one white, a twist notably used in Rihanna’s “Unfaithful”. I’ve seen this in videos featuring mixed-race lead female singers, as a way of showing both sides, although the boyfriends tend to be black. The song alone is spare, but her vocals just don’t hold interest, while in the video the swoops in her voice underscore the tension in the plot. The lyrics seem particularly stupid, especially the chorus:

If I were a boy
I think I could understand
How it feels to love a girl
I swear I'd be a better man
I'd listen to her
Cause I know how it hurts
When you lose the one you wanted
Cause he's taking you for granted
And everything you had got destroyed

I don’t think loving someone else, at its core, is that different from gender to gender. And of course, if she’s becoming a male version of herself she’s going to project that she’s going to do all the wonderful things she wants her boyfriend to do.

If Beyoncé is trying to do something different and expand her reach, more power to her. But she’s one of the most successful artists of this decade (along with the aforementioned Rihanna), and so much of her music is based on attacking men. In this world, they’re all horrible people and women should be independent women, but they somehow go back to the losers time and again. They never learn. Beyoncé needs to move beyond this awful stereotype, especially as her own relationship is widely looked upon as an example of doing it right. She’s setting her listeners up for failure by constantly invoking that men suck, and her male fans are getting quite the slight. After all, she’s married to a guy that’s widely known to be devoted to her (he sings her praises constantly, as do other rappers wishing they were able to tap that), so why malign an entire gender? Her women don’t look so good, either. So Beyoncé , please, if you’re ready to grow up career-wise, please consider your subject matter.

Leona Lewis Is Not All That and a Bag of Chips

I do not like Leona Lewis.

A large part of it stems from the fact that the media is shoving her down our throat. "She's going to be the next Mariah Carey! The next Whitney Houston! Listen to those powerful pipes!" Last I checked, Whitney Houston is now more known for being a disgusting nutjob married to Bobby Brown. Just watch some MadTV. She hasn't had a hit single since 1999, and that was another kiss-off basically telling the world that "It's Not Right, But It's Ok" that her husband (yes, the rumors were around then) cheated on her. Mariah Carey is the template for overly tanned, skin-baring women, and she's gotten this reputation as being as fake as she looks. (I've never heard radio stations trash an artist so much after she was interviewed on Z100 the other week. I was shocked, and very surprised that I didn't hear anything else about it). I guess Leona Lewis could replace them, but so far I haven't seen an iota of her personality, just endless yammering among the music influentials about how fantastic she is. "Bleeding Love" is bland, a mediocre combination of vocals and a bass line. Who are the "they" that keep trying to pull her apart?

Leona Lewis is British, and just because she won a talent contest there--I believe it was The X Factor, not the British version of American Idol, the original Pop Idol--marketers are saying that that means Americans should like her. Newsflash: there are a lot of British groups that never did well in the U.S. Most of them sucked and rightly deserved to stay in Europe with the rest of their genre. Many of them were also boy bands, or derivatives of the form. The only exception I make is Robbie Williams, whose The Ego Has Landed I love. Granted, he was a former boy band member (Take That, who scored one American hit in 1995 with "Back to Good"), but he was cocky, charming, and very funny. I've read many articles over the years trying to explain why he's never done well here, and I've never understood it. The arguments were always incredibly dense and nonsensical. He also wrote his own songs, which reflected his easygoing, carefree life, but The Ego Has Landed was also very pensive, with songs about the paranoia of celebrity ("No Regrets", which really doesn't even come across that way at all) and disintegrating relationships. Standard stuff, but considering the pop songs on these subjects that have come since then ("Pieces of Me", ugh), his album sounds even more lyrical, playful, and forthright than we expect an ex-boybander to be. The songs aren't about exploiting his current troubles, trying to make a statement, but are merely take-it-or-leave-it musings, integrated with the rest of the things in his life. Robbie Williams, like Kylie Minogue, is mainly known as a tremendously successful and talented artist who just cannot replicate their success in America. But they're probably better off for it--not only are they not hounded by TMZ, but we aren't forced to listen to their songs about being hounded by TMZ.

New York Mag awesomeness

THIS IS AWESOME:

http://nymag.com/news/politics/2008/electopedia/

This is why I love the media, why I love the internet, why I love (and hate) our culture. If you're a public figure, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, you have to watch out.

Another reason why New York rocks my socks? Their website has full-text cover stories, I don't have to pay, and their website is chockablock with loads of fascinating stuff.

Vanessa Grigoriadis has also become my new favorite: I'm dying to read her cover assessment of Britney Spears (as soon as I can get my hands on it comes my long-awaited Britney and celebrity post), and her cover story on Gawker was quite awesome.

Now I'm all happy and I really, really need to get to bed.