On Demi Lovato's comments about Taylor Swift
1. I am a fan of both girls. Furthermore, I agree that Taylor Swift is unfairly demonized by the media and the Internet.
2. With that said, Demi makes a fair, although a poorly worded point.
3. Demiās statements do not expect Taylor Swift to take to Washington with a picket sign. The point she is clearly trying to make is one about a passive vs. active approach to the issue.
4. Demi suggests that Taylorās donation to the anti-rape charities is generous, however a very passive and somewhat lackadaisical gesture with regards to the issue at hand. A good comparison would be a removed relative writing you a check at Christmas time out of familial (social) obligation.
5. Why is Demi targeting Taylor Swift? Likely because Taylor Swift has almost become synonymous with ācelebrity feminism.ā Swift frequently uses her platform to speak on feminist issues; however, her tight lips over the Kesha situation was odd, to say the least.
6. Let me clarify some things: first off, the question might be posed: āwell, why do celebrities HAVE to comment on this instance in particular?ā They donāt, however, itās important to frame the Kesha trial within the realm of the industry and pop culture as a whole.
I was talking about the case with my best friend earlier today. My friend, weāll call her Janet, a former music business major at NYU, works in the industry, has worked for major song writing companies, and serves as an assistant in a music management company. Anyway, Janet explained this case to me within the context of the industry. Now, let me state, Janet has worked with very legitimate people (I canāt name them because I donāt want to intrude upon her privacy or any contracts she might have signed), but she insisted that this court case is a huge deal because itās incredibly uncommon to find a producer vs. artist war like this. Furthermore, she suggested that this case will likely become a chapter in a music business textbook years down the road. So, yeah, TLDR: this case is not something to be easily ignored, especially by people in the industry.
7. Therefore, most artists are incredibly aware of the case. So, itās not just something that could have slipped somebodyās mind.
8. Demi is insisting that Taylor, as one of the top artists in the industry and a huge vocal proponent of feminism, should have addressed this situation before being called out on it. WITH THAT SAID, I do not agree with Demiās specific targeting of Taylor Swift. Although we canāt say for sure that she was referring to Taylor Swift, we can only assume thatās the person she was referring to on Twitter. Regardless, I donāt think that Taylor Swift deserves the full serving of public criticism for keeping quiet about the issue. BeyoncĆ©, another incredibly influential feminist artist, also failed to speak out. Emma Watson, although an actress, did not comment on this situation either (as far as Iām aware).
So, any criticism directed specifically at Taylor Swift is, in a way, unfair.
9. Is the criticism merited? Do these quiet feminist icons deserve to be called out for their silence? Thatās your call. My personal opinion is that, if youāre going to call out one quiet feminist artist, you should call out all of them.
10. Is Demiās point derailing the issue? No. āBut what about her use of the phrase āthen Iāll be impressedā? Doesnāt that infer that she doesnāt care about Kesha, that sheās making this about herself?ā No. And anyone picking apart Demiās use of the phrase āthen Iāll be impressedā in her commentary is overanalyzing the sentence to the point where theyāre neglecting the phraseās implication and identity as an expression. The āIā does not mean she wants Swift to LITERALLY impress her, Demi Lovato. It is not meant to be taken literally. Why are people interpreting it as such? Do you honestly think that Demi is requesting that Taylor Swift ātryā to impress her like a jester performing for a king? No! What the hell? This is how the dangers of overanalyzing come into play. You pick something apart so much that you distort your interpretation of the sentence. Demi was CLEARLY using the phrase as an expression saying that actions will gain legitimacy when they address a situation actively rather than passively.
11. āBut what about the Capitol Hill line? Does she expect Taylor to drop everything and go to DC?ā No. Again, people are taking things too literally. She is implying that Taylor take a more active approach by opening a dialogue. āHahaha, okay but what political shit has Demi Lovato ever done?ā Demi has been to Washington countless times and has spoken at many mental health events and conferences. Google if you donāt believe me.
12. āWhat about Kesha? Demi is making this about herself!ā Demi is bad at expressing her intentions coherently, but she is not trying to derail the conversation by ignoring Kesha. She is trying to call more attention to it by signaling to the ābig boysā of feminism and pop music, A listers like Taylor Swift who have larger platforms than her, to use their powerful influence to bring this issue to the forefront so that the mistreatment of women in the industry can be prevented in the future.
jacobvanloon
izzy806
dededos
kianamaiart
stormborns
pixelskylines
