This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I feel like you didn’t actually engage with @Goodguy’s straightforwardly correct observation that 2000’s and 2010’s female popstars were still overwhelmingly conventionally-attractive women who unselfconsciously owned their heteronormatively female sex appeal. Katy Perry certainly never portrayed herself as ugly or weak or broken; she was every bit the bubbly popular girl. Ditto for Kesha, and Christina Aguilera, and Ariana Grande, and Shakira, and Fergie, and Camila Cabello, and Dua Lipa, and Ellie Goulding, and Gwen Stefani… like, I could go on and on. I honestly feel like you didn’t really pay very much attention to what was going on in pop music during that time, and are retroactively applying a political lens to something that was, to be frank, incredibly apolitical the vast majority of the time.
So then what's your interpretation of the "oh you're a Swiftie that's sooo white"? Why is Swiftdom so white-coded compared to the fandoms of other pop-stars through the 2010s? Ocean's 8 was a 2018 film, so the "Swift fans are so white" joke was already a thing back then and it's only more played out now. Certainly Taylor Swift isn't the only conventionally attractive white pop star, and a joke like that wouldn't work for Christina Aguilera or Ariana Grande. If you can't provide an explanation for this then I don't think you're engaging my point.
Obviously it is political, those kind of jokes or public perception comes from somewhere it isn't random. Swift and her fandom is materially different from those other pop-stars. Everyone has picked up on this.
You honestly just throw out these wildly implausible claims, like before saying the culture of the Anglo-Saxons was irrelevant to reproductive selection. And now you're saying that pop music in the 2010s was apolitical. I mean, seriously. No, pop-culture and pop stars and their fandoms, absolutely NONE of that is "incredibly apolitical."
Let’s separate out the distinct claims being disputed, and see how much you and I actually disagree:
This is the specific claim of yours that I took issue with:
But it is you who, I believe, picked two very specific individuals who are helpful to your point, and ignored the vastly larger number of counterexamples which conflict with your narrative. Again, how many normal and conventionally-feminine pop stars from that era do I need to name - women who did not “make themselves look disgusting as part of their act”, nor did they “uglify” themselves. Do you have a single example of any of the women I named trying to downplay their attractiveness or femininity? In what sense are any of them attempting to glorify weakness, brokenness, etc.
All of this is, in my opinion, extremely separate from your (accurate) observation that Taylor Swift is explicitly associated with whiteness in a way that, as far as I’m aware, none of the other women I named are. Prior to her collaboration with rapper Kendrick Lamar on “Bad Blood”, I know there were arguments that she was intentionally cultivating whiteness by not collaborating with any non-white artists - something that most white female popstars (Katy Perry, Kesha, Gwen Stefani, Ellie Goulding, obviously Fergie, etc.) had done repeatedly. Many suspect that Swift’s collaboration with Kendrick was precisely calculated to deflect those accusations. Yet it hasn’t stopped her from being seen as a paragon of whiteness.
I think we can identify a few factors that contribute to why Swift’s whiteness is so remarked-upon. One obvious one is her roots in country music. Now, she was not raised in the South, was never working-class, and has no authentic connection to the culture of normal Southern white people; however, her decision to associate herself with that extremely white-coded (and, given what was true of who was purchasing country music albums at the time, this coding is 100% backed up by reality) genre solidified her whiteness very early. She also gained a huge amount of viral fame due to being accosted onstage by Kanye West - a very black man who embodies many negative black stereotypes - for explicitly racial reasons. (West accused Swift of “taking” a Grammy deserved by a black woman, Beyoncé.) So, she became a battleground for racial conflict even when she was quite young and nowhere near as famous or influential as she is now.
In addition, I would said another thing that’s very white about her is that, contrary to your claim, she is not portraying “the popular girl” in the same way that, say, Katy Perry was. Remember that one of Swift’s most famous early hits - “You Belong With Me” - sees Swift explicitly contrasting herself with the popular girls. (In the music video, her archnemesis and romantic competitor, whom she overcomes, is in fact the prom queen.) This would be far from the last time that Swift would lean into her own fallibility, awkwardness, vulnerability, and discomfort with popularity and fame. I could name songs like “Mean”, “Gorgeous” (where she says she’s going to go home alone to her cats), “Delicate”, “Paper Rings”, “Shake It Off”, etc.
I think that what Swift specifically is embodying, in the subconscious of at least some large segment of her fans is, “A mildly-brainy and introspective girl who found a way to push past her insecurities and stay one step ahead of the predatory world of male executives, without sacrificing the authentic core of who she is.” She’s basically “what would I do if I became famous” to a lot of these women: if they woke up tomorrow as a pretty famous girl, they would have a bunch of flings with hot famous (white) celebrities, get dumped because of a combination of their own personality flaws and the fact that Men Suck, and have to navigate all of the various cultural/low-key-racial tripwires thrown in front of them - just like PMC women have to do in their actual lives!
Swift is beautiful but in a very white way that doesn’t appeal to most black and brown guys - narrow hips, flat ass, comes off as sort of frigid and sexually-unconfident. I think she triggers a ton of the neuroses and insecurities of non-white women in this country; I’m hesitant to speculate on the deep psychological reasons why. I remember seeing a post on Tumblr by a black girl saying something like. “You say you like a thick girl with big titties and curves. Well, I have all of those, and I still know you’re going to end up falling for a white girl who has none of those things, because she makes you laugh.” And Taylor Swift, I think, embodies that in the minds of black women. So, since non-white women find Swift viscerally unappealing, who does that leave to enjoy Swift? White women. (And, to a lesser extent, Asian women.) Swift’s white-coding is as much a result of non-white women rejecting her as it is anything specific that Swift is doing to cultivate whiteness.
The synthesis here is that Taylor Swift’s fandom is politicized/racialized in a way that none of the other popstars’ fandoms of the era were! There was nothing political or controversial about being a Katy Perry fan, or a Kelly Clarkson fan, or any of it. These were not figures with a political valence; their music and image appealed to normal people who don’t care particularly about politics. Obviously certain pop musicians made political noises outside of their music, and a few - P!nk and Lily Allen come to mind - even made political statements within their music. That was very far from the norm, though. And the reasons you presented for why Swift got politicized are, in my opinion, not supported by evidence and are not the actual reasons.
You are engaging in a composition fallacy. My argument was that Swift's persona is "popular, conventionally attractive white girl." You think that pointing out that there are other conventionally attractive white pop stars is a counterargument to this where it isn't. Swift's persona is as the white popular girl, that's her "character." She reminds me of girls I knew growing up, very much a Prom Queen / Girl Next Door sort of character. That is different from the other examples, and how they try to create and refine their image, even though they are also examples of conventionally attractive white pop stars. With Miley Cryus for example showing that just because she's white and conventionally attractive doesn't mean her persona is the same as Swift's. Miley Cryus is also flat, but her persona is not white-coded so it doesn't lead to the same dynamic.
Swift is actually going for the "popular, white, girl next door" vibe and it resonates with a huge number of white girls. Just pointing to other attractive pop stars is not responsive to the argument I'm making.
I of course agree with this, and that's why I relate the backlash to Swift's fandom as a ressentiment against the archetype of the conventionally attractive white girl. So I don't know why you are accusing me of inappropriately applying a political lens when you basically agree with me that backlash towards her fandom is driven by resentment towards Swift's white-coded attractiveness and persona.
There are of course episodes like Kanye West upstaging Swift to defend Beyonce against Swift's rising star. Yeah, there is actual political and culture war in these sorts of events.
Admittedly I don't know much about the Kelly Clarkson fandom, but I'm 100% sure if I studied that fandom for a few hours I would absolutely be able to identify political issues underlying the fandom, Clarkson's image, etc. The idea these issues just apply to Taylor Swift but don't apply to Beyonce is just really illogical.
These are your words! The very clear implication here is that Swift is a change from the prevailing trends. Therefore, pointing out that the overwhelmingly majority of pop stars during the entire era you’re referencing did not in fact workshop weakness and ugliness and brokenness, and did represent the exact same “persona” you’re claiming Swift does, is a pretty strong counterargument against the claim that Swift represents a meaningful deviation from the norm. Swift is just better at the “conventional attractive white girl” thing than the other women I named, because she can do everything they can do and also transcend it; she plays guitar, she writes her own lyrics (unlike most of her female contemporaries in pop music) and those lyrics have a depth and wit and vulnerability that the others’ don’t. Also no amount of dieting and careful skincare and application of style and makeup is going to make the average white women look like Katy Perry (who was blessed by genetics with some truly prodigious endowments) but it can make her look like Taylor Swift - who, as you noted, was not stunningly beautiful at the beginning of her career.
You still have to explain why Swift is getting that backlash, and other comparable popstars do not get the same backlash, despite not doing any of the things you claimed it’s necessary to do - uglifying oneself, “worshipping weakness”, making a postmodern critique of femininity - to avoid backlash. Why are black women not furious at Katy Perry and Gwen Stefani and Kesha and etc. etc. etc. It’s not because those women made themselves ugly and unpopular and Swift didn’t. That was your original claim, and I believe I’ve conclusively demonstrated that it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I think it’s difficult to identify precisely why Swift has become a lightning rod in the way that many other extremely similar figures have not, but I don’t think there’s any merit to the idea that Swift, unlike her contemporaries, is a “return” to something that was missing.
You didn't even quote the most operative part of my comment:
You have admitted that backlash against Swift is influenced by resentment towards a White archetypical beauty and social type that resonates in particular with White girls and seems to be threatening in some way to a non-white audience. When I mentioned "the worship of the weak and ugly and broken" I was referring to Wokeness as a whole that elevates ugly and broken people. You are overstating your disagreement.
The DR is correct to interpret Swift's fandom as a latent celebration of "whiteness" as it were, in a way that does not apply to other pop stars, and correct to interpret the resentment towards it as having a racial undertone that the Right Wing should perceive and not support just because Swift endorses a Democrat.
Can you just acknowledge that Katy Perry's "persona" is not the same as Taylor Swift's? And that the latter is playing a straight archetype of popular white girl? Katy Perry is not going for that, she has her own image and look. I don't think Katy Perry plays the "popular girl next door" persona like Swift does. I don't think Perry goes for the "Prom Queen white girl vibe" like Swift embraces. Do you? If you agree with me then I'm still struggling to understand why you take such issue with my comment.
The big point I’m trying to get across is that while ressentiment toward popular attractive normal white people is a major component of wokeness, it has not significantly impacted pop music during the time you’re claiming that it did. There were still tons of normal attractive white pop stars during this time, selling out arenas. For every Lizzo there’s a dozen thin and sexually normative men and women outselling her and outperforming her on the charts.
If anything, pop music is far more the exclusive domain of pretty people than it was in previous eras you’re pointing to; the collapse of “bands” as a viable commercial music model led to a marked decrease in the number of unattractive-but-musically-gifted pop musicians. In the 1970s and 80s, Billy Joel could become a successful popular musician, selling out arenas to young people. There is no equivalent whatsoever in the world of pop music today. Maybe Adele? But of course Adele was noted as an extreme exception at the time because it was so rare for unattractive people to become successful and marketable pop musicians - and it still is today.
No, I do not acknowledge that, which is the whole source of our disagreement.
Firstly, on the subject of Katy Perry: I would submit her music video for “Teenage Dream” as a perfect encapsulation of the “popular and attractive white girl has sex with jocky white guy” archetype you’re pointing to. Katy Perry in her prime was every bit the gorgeous prom-queen type of woman you’re gesturing at; is it just the fact that she isn’t blonde and Germanic-looking responsible for you associating her with some other sort of image? I’m not sure what “archetype” you imagine her to be portraying.
Now, on to Taylor Swift. Which era of Swift’s career are we talking about? Like, the whole conceit of the Eras tour is based on the fact that her image, the thematic content of her music, her appearance, have all fluctuated dramatically throughout various junctures in her career. These fluctuations can roughly be sorted in terms of her different albums, or at least in clusters of albums.
The first stage of her career was her “country era”: her eponymous debut album (2006), Fearless (2008), and Speak Now (2010). On these albums she absolutely does not embody the “popular girl/prom queen” archetype; again, on her biggest hit from this era (“You Belong With Me”) she very explicitly places herself in contrast with this archetype. Her lyrical themes in this era are about vulnerable and wholesome teen romance, from the perspective of a sort of outsider. (Swift herself never finished high school, instead transferring to a homeschooling academy that could accommodate her extensive touring schedule.) Her Christian upbringing heavily influenced her lyrical content and image at this time. The “girl next door” archetype may be tentatively applied to her at this time, although it’s specifically the kind of girl who will expect you to marry her before she puts out. (So, certainly not the archetypal “prom queen”, who traditionally has a healthy sex life with her jock prom queen boyfriend.
Then you have her pop-transition era with Red (2012) and 1989 (2014). I will grant you that in this specific era, she’s more comfortably embodying the “hot popular girl with conventional interests and opinions common to mainstream white people” archetype. She also surrounded herself in public with a bunch of models and attractive female celebrities, nearly all of them white. If you were making your argument during this period of time, I would uncontroversially agree with you. Still, though, none of these albums include any swear words, so she’s still hanging onto her more reserved and conservative roots at this time.
Then on Reputation (2017) she becomes more jaded, self-conscious, and ambivalent about her fame, her public reputation (hence the album title), her romantic failures, etc. It’s the first Swift album with a swear word, and it also contains a ton of more “urban” musical influences. Its lyrical content contains a lot of personal introspection, discussion of her own personal foibles, and emotional depth. It is certainly not the work of someone who is blithely comfortable in her own skin and her own high-status normality, which is what the “prom queen” archetype is all about.
On Lover (2019) she’s somewhat back to the popular-girl side of her personality; it’s also the first Swift album containing political commentary, with the song “You Need To Calm Down” crudely attacking “homophobia”. Still, though, it’s decent ammunition for your claim that she’s leaning into the “popular girl” thing. (Other than on “Paper Rings”, my favorite song on the album.)
However, this archetype is totally abandoned on Folklore (2020) and Evermore (2020). This is where she begins her “crunchy art hoe” era. These albums have an almost Joni Mitchell style singer-songwriter vibe. They’re not anything that a prom queen would be capable of producing or identifying with. Everything from the production to Swift’s image during this time is very understated, very organic, very unpreposessing. (During this time, Swift put out a ton of videos of her at home with no makeup, in her pajamas, hanging out with her cats and writing music. This is the work of someone who wants to project a very different sort of “normality” than the popular girl/influencer type.)
Now with her latest album, The Tortured Poets Department, she’s still pretty much in her artsy era, although of course the authenticity of it is somewhat complicated by the fact that she’s now a billionaire. And of course especially now that she’s dating Travis Kelce and is looking hotter than ever, that “popular girl with the jock boyfriend” is an unavoidable part of her public persona, since it’s actually uncontrovertibly true about her for the first time in her life. But it has not been a constant throughout her career, is not the primary reason for her popularity (since it wasn’t true during large portions of her success and popularity) and is only one element of her appeal. Popular girls can see themselves in Swift, but so can gawky PMC and academic types, and even conservative Christian purity types can vibe strongly with her first three albums. She’s a chameleon of sorts, not really an “archetype” or “persona” in the way you’re claiming. She’s many things to many people, and any attempt to reduce her to a particular archetype is going to run up against counterexamples from her own life and career, depending on where you want to point to.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link