Now let’s look at these lyrics: OK now he was close, tried to domesticate you But you’re an animal, baby it’s in your nature Just let me liberate you, You don’t need no paper,That man is not your maker. Kind of sounds like a women’s lib anthem if you ask me. I recently read an article on XO Jane that discusses the problems with women in relationships being seen as a man’s territory. And that is exactly what Robin Thicke’s character is saying! “That man is not your maker”—he’s saying her boyfriend doesn’t own her! Granted he has a vested interest in saying that, in that he wants her to stray from her relationship to be with him, but essentially he’s reminding her that she’s an independent person who can make her own decisions about her sexuality, regardless of whether she has a boyfriend.I think in order to understand why I don’t find the song offensive, we have to ask ourselves what it is really about. Everyone seems to think it’s about a guy slinging a helpless girl over his shoulder or dragging her home by her hair. Not so. It is, in essence, about a guy trying to steal a girl away from her boyfriend/current love interest for some hanky-panky. In this sense, the song is no more offensive than “You Belong with Me” by Taylor Swift (although in this brief side note I would argue that the latter is actually MORE offensive. Look at her lyrics: “She wears high heels/I wear sneakers….She wears short skirts/I wear tee shirts.” Here, Ms. Nice-Girl-Next-Door is actually implying that the clothes she chooses makes her more down to earth, and therefore more worthy of Neighbor Boy’s love. Now THAT is Grade A slut-shaming, and I don’t see anyone batting an eye).
I've gotta say... This makes a lot of sense.
I have to say that I found myself sort of agreeing with this article. But it is a poor argument in a few ways. Taylor Swift is a big slut-shamer but I have heard many people upset about it. It may not have made as big main-stream controversy as blurred lines but it definitely had people batting an eye. So I disagree that people are letting her off the hook and that this is a good argument for why Blurred Lines is not misogynist. Secondly they purposefully ignore the worst lines in the song. I know you want it I know you want it I know you want it You're a good girl Can't let it get past me You're far from plastic Talk about getting blasted I hate these blurred lines I know you want it is what men have been known to say to girls who say no, but they are convinced no means yes. Can't let it get past me just seems a bit rapey again. I hate these blurred lines I don't think it is a stretch to see this as the blurred lines between consent and statutory rape. Later in the song: Maybe less rapey then other lyrics but definitely not the women's rights message this article makes it seem like he is trying to give. Hey, hey, hey What rhymes with hug me? Hey, hey, hey This one isn't as offensive as it is just poor rhyme scheme. I've also heard that he said he has been respectful to women his whole life and this song was like his break from that. But I haven't been able to confirm it with a link, so that is just something I heard. Personally I'm not a big fan of pop (except Macklemore now he seems like a nice guy).And that's why I'm gon' take a good girl
You the hottest bitch in this place
You wanna hug me
I recall having or reading a conversation with theadvancedapes and he said is Thicke was a happily married man to his high school sweetheart. Let's not forget that there was a music video too in which the women were basically sex objects. -Nothing new, but it makes it all the more easy to believe that the lyrics are about empowering women. Still, I enjoyed this read/take on the situation.
The video for this is essentially the women on sex objects. He can be happily married to his high school sweetheart and still be a misogynist. Most men were married when practically everyone was sexist. Plus I'm saying the song is bad, I don't know how much he wrote it.