I like Pink. I’ve got several of her albums on my phone, and I think her latest song is lovely.
But then I watched the video and realized that she is a mammal: a filthy, stinking, sweaty, hairy mammal. Pink has nipples. I am so disillusioned. Until I saw that video, I hoped that maybe she was some kind of mollusc, or possibly an arachnid…I’d even have settled for an annelid.
But no. Mammal she is, with mammae, no tentacles or siphon in sight, no spinnerets, not even any chaetae. I am not the only one shattered by this revelation: lots of people are upset that Pink has flashed the world with the news that she is not only a vertebrate, but is also a member of the class Mammalia.
At least some people have been vigorous in their denunciations.
Nipples and breasts are a normal part of human anatomy. Not just women’s anatomy, either. Men have nipples too. Shocker, I know. But you never see this kind of thing when men are topless, much less when you can, god forbid, see their nipples through their shirt. Societal shaming of women’s breasts and nipples is ridiculous, outdated, and frankly, it’s a steaming pile of horseshit that needs to stop.
So let’s just go ahead and clear this up for the people who haven’t turned the calendar page yet: Stop trying to police women’s bodies and their clothes based on your own views of modesty and propriety. Seriously. STOP.
As Lauren Duca so eloquently put it for Teen Vogue, “The thing about nipples is literally everyone has them, but we choose to sexualize only women’s nipples. There isn’t something inherently sexual about female nipples as compared to male nipples. Anatomically speaking, female nipples are for feeding babies. And yet, because we apply this absurd stigma to female nipples, as if we’ve all agreed to pretend the mere sight of female nipples will lead us astray.”
Wait, what? They’re not outraged that a mammal has been allowed to flagrantly sing in public at all…but some people are upset to discover that mammals have mammary glands? That makes no sense at all. It’s right there in the name, people! Jeez. Are you also going to get pissy when you find out teleosts have bones, or that arthropods have jointed limbs?
This is a very US thing. I remember visiting my dad who was in the States in the eighties and trying to work out why I was being ogled by every bloke we met, not being a stunning beauty I simply wasn’t used to this level of attention and a trip across the Atlantic hadn’t magically improved my looks or figure. What that trip had done, as my dad pointed out, was completely change the attitude to not wearing a bra, which I was so used to doing I hadn’t even brought one with me. I went out and bought a bra and !shazaam! I was back to the level of ogling I was used to; well sort of, don’t get me started on the whole ‘every woman wears make-up’ thing.
It’s perfectly fine to show all manner of violence against women, but we draw a line at showing a little too much natural anatomy? There’s good christian values right there.
Nice song with a great message, I hope both my daughter and my son hear it. And speaking of anatomy, girl has some strong looking arms and shoulders. She could probably kick a few deserving asses.
I should perhaps have said a very parts of the US thing, my dad was at Champaign-Urbana in Illinois.
That’s a beautiful and classy performance. That’s all that needs to be said about it.
I’m only slightly surprised that the folks that were criticizing the nipples weren’t having a go at her for wearing “manly” trousers.
ajbjasus,
At least she wasn’t exposing her ankles. Can you imagine the frenzy that would have incited?
Always remember that the average human being has approximately: one breast, two nipples, one testicle, half a penis and half a vagina!
@kenbakermn #2: P!nk is an ex-gymnast who incorporates acrobatics, yoga, and ballet into her shows. You think her 38 year old shoulders are impressive in that lovely video, you should see her holding her 5’4″ own against an almost 6 foot Colt Prattes during her ’12 AMA performance of Try. (CN pantomimed domestic violence) Or, for further feats of strength, last year’s AMA in which she and her dancers performed while dangling off the side of a 34 story hotel.
Alas, none of that kind of thing, however impressive, does much to silence the outwardly directed internalized misogyny of women policing other women for not being ashamed of having nipples, nor men trying to shame women for having fleshy tissue with their nipples, nor the long standing, practically bulletproof social scripts from whence misogyny comes. No matter how strong we are, internally or externally, we’re still expected to conform to something, and body shame is at the top of the list. Sometimes especially if we’re physically strong, as people tend to interpret “muscles” as “can’t be hurt because lacks feelings.” (see also: “brave”)
These are the same people who get upset that animals don’t wear pants.
Dogs and cats are almost always running around stark naked.
And don’t even think about looking around at a farm with livestock!!!
Through her entire performance, Pink’s breasts were completely covered, which is already more decency than is asked of men… It really never is enough, is it?
Special kudos to Love Barnett (see the link) for each of the following, especially:
1. upper topper flopper stopper
and:
2. over-the-shoulder boulder holder
while the bronze medal is a tie:
3=. mammary muzzles
3=. boob jail
I keep asking myself over and over: What is wrong with these people?
Ok after all that foofurah I thought she went topless in the video at some point. But that’s it? Insufficient underwear? That’s not even PG-rated.
Some people are weird.
I don’t know about the others but Barnett didn’t coin “over the shoulder boulder holder.” That’s been around since forever.
When they quit making Peg Bundy’s bra, Al had to go to Francine’s of Hollywood in Oconomowoc, Wisconsin to find it. “If you’ve got the boulders, we’ve got the holders.”
(That was the episode that triggered that woman in Minnesota’s campaign to get the show canceled, so nothing ever changes….)
Oh don’t be silly. I’ve had my nipples sexualized quite a few times. And not always in a good way. Grrraaaagggh …
So I watched the music video… and that is it? The vague outline of an entirely natural part of human anatomy, fully covered by fabric? Some people are ridiculously precious when it comes to this kind of thing. Think how horrified they must be in cold weather, where the normal bodily reaction of women to such temperatures could easily result in nipples being discernible even through a bra worn under a sweater or other such garment. Oh the humanity! Surely the doom of civilisation right there…
Or, you know, you could just avert your eyes out of respect for the person in question and go on with your life none the worse for wear. Nipples, whether covered by fabric or even (Shock! Horror!) exposed in the flesh, don’t actually cause one’s eye balls to boil in their sockets, nor do any demonstrable psychological harm to anyone. Our society’s weird fixations and hangups are the problem, not the bodies of women (or men for that matter).
Maybe if they paid a little more attention to the lyrics of the song she is singing, rather than focusing on an irrelevant aspect of her wardrobe, they might actually learn something.
@17
But that would imply that her existence wasn’t solely for their arousal, which some men have a terrible problem with.
Oh, unholy void! I thought from PZ’s post that there were unclothed nipples in the video. Putting aside my own unhealthy obsessions for a moment, what the fuck? Pink’s nipples showed through her clothes? Is that it? That happens, fer Chris’s sake. You ignore it, especially since it can happen for a host of reasons. Even my almost functionless nips will do it in the right conditions.
Good lord she is amazing. So many of her songs have brought me right to tears. It pains me to think anyone could be so vacuous as to be distracted from that brilliance by nipple shadows.
If you want to see singer and performer Tove Lo* deal with rudeness swiftly, see “Disco Tits” at uTube (nothing raunchy, just a person standing up for herself)
* “Lo” means “lynx” in Swedish
When I use an online dating service, I always enter “theropod” as preference to avoid nipples.
If we mammals from singing, what would the fox say?
Well, I don’t have anything against breasts and nipples, but if my secretary came to work wearing a semi-transparent top, I’m afraid I would have to have a quiet word with him. Or her. In the same vein, and in my opinion, Pink’s semi-transparent top was a poor choice because, apart from it being a distraction from the song and the lyrics, it didn’t seem to be in tune with the song and lyrics either. But maybe someone who can see the connection can explain it to me. In the end, though, it’s her creation, so it’s her choice. Perhaps she thought it was neither here nor there, and would have been just as happy to wear something else. No big deal.
billyjoe
It only is when you blame her for your arousal instead of yourself. Nudity and semi-nudity may have sexual connotations but they may also stand for purity and innocence. From the video I think it is quite clear what Pink intended.
How can it possibly be in the same vein? This is Pink’s music video. Your workplace is not your secretary’s creative space or artistic creation. The decisions made here were artistic decisions made by Pink and the team doing the video. You really don’t see the difference between your workplace environment and this music video?
Also, like rietpluim said, you being distracted by the contour of people’s nipples is your problem.
If I showed up at scholl like that I’d be in trouble as well, which means what exactly?* I’d probably also get a stern talking to if I showed up in the clothing my husband wears to work. Or the one the dolphin trainer at the Barcelona Zoo wears. Different jobs have different clothing guidelines, who would have thought.
Now, if you could point us to some semi-official guideline for rock and pop stars?
1. If you were distracted the problem might be you.
2. Your opinion
I didn’t know Pink makes her songs and videos for you in person, but what do I know?
Let me see, a very simple basic outfit in a black and white video to a song about personal strength and empowerment…
Also, no big deal says the guy whining about how it distracted him so much.
+++
One of Pink’s better songs. I’m not exactly a fan, but she has a knack for songs that hit a nerve.
“There’s not enough rope to tie me down” didn’t offer the slightest clue? Bras are frequently constricting and uncomfortable.Many women consider them torture devices, and remove them the moment they are home for the evening, or even in the car while en route. Her costume here is loose and very comfortable looking, and clearly going braless is part of the artistic statement.
The sad attempts at Mom-shaming are especially bizarre. Babys and children are absolutely comfortable with nipples and breasts that have also been their source of food and comfort since birth. If anything they start to get possessive of them before they are weaned. Does this guy really think her daughter is unaware that her mom has breasts, or is going to be irreparably damaged by boobs?
Tethys:
Children have breasts and nipples too. Why teach her daughter to be ashamed of them?
It’s yet another episode of men pretending that it’s so hard to understand womens communication. She is wearing a wife-beater, no bra, and singing about how she won’t be broken, repressed, or silenced. Derp, what could she possibly be trying to say? The mere outlines of her nipples have sucked all reason from the video, like little black holes.
The mildly deranged penguin points out that if long pigs kept their feathers, laid eggs to keep the stoopid males occupied, and stopped eating her cheese, then they wouldn’t have to worry so much.
The mildly deranged penguin is fun to read but hard to follow sometimes.
She’s often quite easy to follow: First, to pick up her trail, check the local fromagerie. You will probably, very probably, find one or more penguin-shaped holes in the walls of the now-empty shop. (If not, wait a few moments. She’ll soon visit.) Help the fromager up, and after a long discussion about the state of the national rugby team, head out through one of the penguin-holes on her trail. Her footprints will usually be very clear and indicate in which direction she was heading (if there is any doubt, wake up a few of the dazed onlookers and ask). She normally heads in a straight line, so provided you don’t mind clambering through wrecked buildings, derailed trains, and the occasional sinking ship, you will soon find yourself at another fromagerie with the distinctive holes in the walls.
Repeat.
Whilst trailing her isn’t always that difficult, catching up with her is rather harder. And actually catching her is not recommended, unless you like becoming a cheese fondue.
Maybe had she been bullet-ridden, it would have been more acceptable? Or perhaps if an undead creature ripped out her jugular? Holy fuck does our American puritanism have its priorities bass-ackwards.
Nice song, though. Sure would have rather seen her do the SB halftime show. She has twice the talent of Timberlake and from what I’ve seen, her stage shows look spectacular. All Justin did was sound awful and move from stage to stage making sure the camera had him nice and tight. Although, (getting back to nipples) it would have been funny if Janet Jackson showed up and ripped his shirt off.
Off topic, but with Elton John being on his farewell tour, The NFL would be daft not to book him for next year. Meaning, of course, that they won’t.
♩♫ Il coccodrillo come fa?
Non c’è nessuno che lo sa! ♬♪
I think men who haven’t grown up with sisters tend not to know such things.
Now, female artists regularly wear much more revealing outfits in videos (here’s the cover of the album, for example), not to mention background dancers in male artists’ videos, to much less fuss and public outcry.
So what’s the difference? I can tell you. In this video, the nipples are not for straight dude’s consumption. They just are. Pink is not performing for the male gaze, she’s not trying to look sexy. And we can’t be having that. It’s the same that regularly gets people to freak out over women breastfeeding in public: There are tits and they are completely removed from the context of sexualisation.
The woman that runs this site: https://www.toplesstopics.org/ runs into this nonsense with web hosting. Post a video which is about desexualizing breasts, get a) blocked, b) removed, or c) told to put it in the “pay to see” section, along with the porn, because, OMG its got nipples in it!!! Not to mention how often videos involving medical stuff, including cancer survivor videos, etc. get hit the same way, for the same reason, but *only* if its a woman’s nipples on display.
But, heh, its par for the course, seems like. Just look at the idiot nonsense that happened on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. Because, imaginary criminals, and people with breasts are *way* more scary and dangerous to society that, say, hate groups online, or real live pick pockets on the streets…
Sigh. Right, so.. stop the ride now, please. Its time to get off. It stopped being fun when people started opening theme parks that make “the time machine” from Idiocracy seem sensible. i.e. the Ark Park. The dystopia exhibit we are passing now is just one *more* step into the world of, “too far”. lol
QFFT
Unfortunately, hypocrisy is a virtue in today’s society.
rietpluim,
Famous pop singer, video has her wearing a bodytight singlet, the which has no particular significance? Seems like a deliberate stylistic choice to me.
Whatever she may be trying to do, that she, the production company or marketers had no idea before release that some might see it as titillating is not very plausible.
—
Giliell:
Clearly not the case, else this very post would not exist nor would the freak-outs to which you refer. You are confusing what you think should be with what is.
Jesus fuck, John Morales, haven’t you read a single comment above? Or do you think that the male gaze is the only possible particular significance?
Someone said she did not put on this performance for me. But, it’s a public performance, and I’m part of the public….so, yeah, the performance was for me…and everyone else who watches it. If she didn’t intend that, she wouldn’t have made and released the video. I actually listened to the song before looking at the video. I liked the song. I didn’t think the video did much for the song. As I said, for me, it distracted from the song. You may differ. No big deal (that’s what I meant by that!). We are all different. I like impressionist paintings, others don’t. No big deal.
And I don’t know why so many of you deny that there is titillation involved, even if that was not her intention. In fact, it is possible that this was not her intention. She may have been intended it as solely as metaphor. Or she may have been intending a bit of both titillation and metaphor. I accept the explanations given that going bra less could be seen as a metaphor for freeing herself from constrictions convention tries to impose on her. That seems reasonable. But to deny there is also some titillation involved just seems disengenuous to me.
I am a male. I have male levels of testosterone. Female breasts and nipples turn me on, depending on the female, and the situation. Like almost all males. That’s not a problem. The problem comes from either acting out the turn-on in inappropriately ways or denying that very human response of being turned on and suppressing it. To be honest, and no reflection on her, but Pink’s breasts and nipples didn’t turn me on so much as distract me from the song. And, again, your mileage may differ.
John Morales
Did you actually read what you quoted or did you just need a stand in?
billyjoe
Thank you for being such a fine illustration of the problem.
How does one get to be so full of oneself?
Not every performance by an artist has all the public in mind as a target audience, yet you are so used to being the most important demographic that you need to spill a lot of ink over the fact that one female artist once failed to do so.
You remind me of all the white people complaining about Beyoncé and Black Panther.
Stop making women responsible for your actions. Here’s a fun fact: we spend a lot less time thinking about you than you believe. I know, men are used to viewing themselves as being of great importance, but you’re not.
Most of the time we don’t think about you when getting dressed or wearing make up. Sometimes we may think about a particular guy. Hardly ever about “guys” in general.
I take “having an opinion while being fucking ignorant for 500, Alex”.
Women’s breasts have not been and are not sexualised in all times and places. You getting a boner has pretty little to do your testosterone, but a lot with the culture you’ve been raised in. Gay dudes also have testosterone and don’t get aroused by titties, lesbian and bi women have pretty little testosterone but most of us still like tits.
Women’s bodies do not exist for your sexual gratification. Neither Pink nor any other woman on planet earth owes you am explanation for how they dress. You can be turned on or off, but you are responsible for your reaction and nobody else. Women are in no way obliged to arrange their lives for your convenience.
billyjoe, #41
Her nipples didn’t distract you from the song. Your sexualization of women’s nipples (and not of men’s nipples) distracted you from the song. The cause lies in you, not in Pink or in women.
I was in the Peace Corps in Africa, where women are often topless in public. It takes a while for the prudish Westerner to take this in stride, but after a month or so, one barely notices. It was very clear that there was nothing inherently sexually stimulating about a woman’s decision to go topless. More often than not, it was because the weather was hot. Context matters. In an intimate situation, a breast is an erogenous zone. In a market where the temparature is over 40 Centigrade, it is a radiating surface. In a video, covered by clothing…well, damn, guys, just get over yourselves.
Giliell,
I’m sorry, but you read too much into what I say and you often ignore what I do say.
Where, for example, did I say or imply that I am the most important demographic? All I said is that Pink performs for the public, that I am part of the public, and therefore she performs for me. You imply that Pink performs for a certain demographic. But how do you know that? She may view every member of the public as her potential target audience. My eighty year old grandfather watched a Pink DVD with his daughter and was quite impressed.
And I didn’t say that Pink failed me. I said I liked the song when I listened to the song on its own. I said that, for me, the video distracted from the song. Your mileage may differ. No big deal. Different things appeal to different people. And neither did I demand she dress in her video in any other way than what she did. I specifically said: “it’s her creation, so it’s her choice”. I’m surely allowed to disagree with her choice without saying her choice was wrong as you seem to imply.
In your second paragraph, you accuse me of holding women responsible for my actions. Sure, I wouldn’t have felt titillated if all those women on the beach did not look so sexy in their bikinis. But I don’t hold them responsible for me being titillated. Neither do I think it’s a bad thing that they are in bikinis. Or that I am titillated by them being in bikinis. It’s just natural response of the vast majority of males of which I am one. If you can deal with that, I’ll deal with the fact (as I already have) that most women most of the time would not care if they are titillating men and do not wear bikinis for that reason.
In your third paragraph, you remind me that women’s breasts are not sexualised in all times and places. So, you must have missed the part where I said “depending on the situation”. But you are being disingenuous if you deny the effects of testosterone. Of course it’s not only testosterone. It’s also the state of all the other hormones, the state of the hormone receptors, brain chemistry, genetics, environmental influences, and the situation in which the person finds themselves. I have read Robert Sapolsky’s book “Behave: The biology of humans at their best and worst” so I’m not completely ignorant on this topic.