Is sex no longer selling in music?

[StrawberryBlond 14,102]

12 hours ago, PMKKARDASHiAN said:

To each there own. Maybe because selena and ariana look too innocent for me, I like my girls to look like they know a thing or two about sex, but these girls look so sweet. And idk why I don't find gaga sexy...her ass is incredible!! But her breasts...are sad boobs. She was sexy when she came out in 08, but knowing her now and following her now, she's just not sexy to me?? 

And whaaaaat?? Rihanna and Beyonce are the epitome of sexy! Their eyes, their body language, their sultry voices. If I liked twang I'd deeef be into them! And I completely forgot about shakira!  she is insanely sexy! 

I sorta get how you find Selena too innocent - she does have very childlike features. I always found that shower scene in Good For You awkward as she looks a bit too young for nudity. But she does look older at other times. I think Ariana looks the opposite of innocent, especially the way she dresses! She's got the most amazing legs and she's always wearing miniskirts and kneehigh boots with them and when she sits, she's always crossing and uncrossing her legs...and then there's her gorgeous smile and laugh...her voice, singing and speaking...I'm mystified as to why some people aren't into it. I'm a straight woman and even I'd swing the other way for that! Again, I think because i know what it's like to look young, I realise it probably gets to her that she gets dismissed as innocent just because of how she looks when she likely feels the exact opposite and wishes to be viewed that way. Not finding her sexy is a matter of preference but to not see her as a sexual being at all, I find that a bit harsh. I sometimes wonder if it's the reason I can't get guys interested in me. As for Gaga, what's the matter with her breasts? They're real and a normal size. I think it's because we've seen so many fake ones, we think they should all look like 2 solid orbs, so everything else looks saggy in comparison. I'm the opposite - I think she's got sexier as time has gone on. When she debuted, she looked and acted too mainstream for me to see her in that way, too much like everyone else. But then as she got older and got more comfortable with her looks and body, she started looking much more attractive because she didn't look like everyone else. Plus, she got better wigs, make up and outfits that were far more flattering.

Can't put my finger on why I don't find Beyonce sexy, I just...don't. She's got the moves but I don't feel anything from them. But it's partly because I find her too full of herself and when someone's in love with themselves, it erases sexiness. Rihanna would be sexy if she didn't have such an attitude problem too. With her, her personality just turns me right off. A "sultry" look translates into a bitchy look or an "I'm better than you" look if it's on someone who's not very nice. Another big notable omission from my personal idea of sexy is Madonna. To me, she's sexual but not sexy. All her sexiness always felt like an act, a performance and her voice never sounds natural. Yet, a lot of people who've worked with her go on about how she's the sexiest woman ever. I don't get it.

11 hours ago, Harry said:

Why do I feel like you're just making this thread to shade and diminish the accomplishments of Selena Gomez?

Honestly, Harry, this is not the case. I have nothing against Selena. I liked Good For You, it's going to be on my favourite songs of the year list. I thought Revival was ok but not as good as people made it out to be. I thought her last album was decent too and liked the singles. I even said she's really pretty. Please don't judge my opinion of someone based on one comment that I said a while back. I only said I hoped Demi's album would do better because I deemed it the better album, hence, wanted it to get more success. I'm a "let the best album win" kinda person, it meant no more or less than that. This thread was made purely because this situation has been dawning on me for a while now, across many artists. It was actually the lack of support for Ariana so far that made me feel inclined to make this. Selena was just one of the names I picked up when I was thinking of examples, she wasn't even the first one I thought of, as you can see from putting her further down the list. I really don't want you to dismiss my entire argument based on this one assumption which you've got totally wrong.

11 hours ago, just4fun said:

I completely agree with everything except Ariana Grandes new video being sexual. It's anything but sexual. The song under performed because it was a bad song. The video streaming is the only thing keeping it in the top 20 of the Hot100. Lord knows it's not the sales. 

I do think the public has become desensitized to female sexuality. Even the VS fashion show lost 3 Million viewers. However The Weeknd's album is a major hit. So IMO it's female sexuality that is over saturated in the media.

Not sexual? She's flicking her hair, licking her lips, running her hands over her body, showing off her legs, wearing miniskirts that give upskirt peeks...this is one of the most sexual pop videos I've ever seen. Whether the song is bad or not is irrelevant. Bad songs have always gotten popular if a pretty face sings them, especially if they've just come off the back of a really successful era. After all the success Ariana had with My Everything, I thought that would automatically translate into massive radio support and sales regardless of the quality of her output. I see it happen all the time, so the lack of support really shocked me.

Exactly, I think it's female sexuality in particular that's oversaturated. It explains why men are actually selling it a bit better at the moment. Like I was saying before, it's much easier to get women to be attracted to men in music. even if they're not conventionally attractive. I've heard girls say they find Ed Sheeran hot and sexy, even if it's followed by "for a ginger" or in a weird crush type of way. But it's probably because they love his sweet love songs, so it translates into attraction. I don't think you'd be able to get a plain looking female artist seen in the same light by men.

10 hours ago, TimisaMonster said:

Adele is the answer to this question

Thread closed

Do you think it's because talent trumps sexuality? Do you think it makes the other females look uncreative and tryhard? Because I don't see why there can't be room for both. I don't like how music goes through big phases with the public. There's nothing wrong with a bit of 50/50 raunch/conservatism to keep everyone happy rather than all artists trying to appeal to one taste. I can't begin to tell you how loathsome music would be if everyone tried to copy Adele. I'm so glad I didn't live through the 70's either - the awful disco trend would have driven me off my nut.

[Harry 26,836]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Honestly, Harry, this is not the case. I have nothing against Selena. I liked Good For You, it's going to be on my favourite songs of the year list. I thought Revival was ok but not as good as people made it out to be. I thought her last album was decent too and liked the singles. I even said she's really pretty. Please don't judge my opinion of someone based on one comment that I said a while back. I only said I hoped Demi's album would do better because I deemed it the better album, hence, wanted it to get more success. I'm a "let the best album win" kinda person, it meant no more or less than that. This thread was made purely because this situation has been dawning on me for a while now, across many artists. It was actually the lack of support for Ariana so far that made me feel inclined to make this. Selena was just one of the names I picked up when I was thinking of examples, she wasn't even the first one I thought of, as you can see from putting her further down the list. I really don't want you to dismiss my entire argument based on this one assumption which you've got totally wrong.

if you say so

[Emvee 7,639]

On December 12, 2015 at 4:34 PM, GAGA1972 said:

It has nothing to do with sex not selling. It never really has. It all depends on how commercial/quality the music is. 

Yes, I completely agree. 

Its just a coincidence that many successful pop songs have the "sexy popstar" image packaged with them, because labels want the perfect package. But if a song is ucommercial and/or bland, regardless of how sexy the  popstar is, the song won't be successful. 

I.e. Christina Aguilera. Stripped was successful because it had bops that came at just the right time. Her later work, which was still pretty sexual... Not so much. 

It comes down to the music no matter what social commentary you're trying to push. 

Another example is how Gaga was massively successful despite being the antithesis of sexy and being labeled as a "tranny," which in 2008 was still a somewhat socially acceptable insult. Hell many socially awkward Gaga haters still call her tranny  

[Jester 6,276]

Thank God

[StrawberryBlond 14,102]

15 hours ago, Harry said:

if you say so

I would really appreciate it if you would stop acting like you know me and all my intentions. Quite frankly, I don't think anything will convince you that you've got me all wrong. Every time I try to be nice and civil to you, you don't want to know. I think that you almost want me to be nasty. Well, I hate to disappoint, but I'm just not that kind of person. Lately, I've noticed that you seem to be on the warpath with others as well, so I know it's not just me. Why do you always have a bone to pick with people? Just chill out.

[Kayla 7,595]

I think things go in phases. Once you let sexiness for the sake of sales go on for so long it loses its value. Similarly, if we enter a span of time where 'classy' singers get all the attention eventually people are going to want something more flashy and we may slip back into the sexual imagery as a dominant force. 

My hope is that we move, someday, into a frame of mind that focuses on the talent of the artist and the genuine expression of the artist instead of selling points. 

EDIT: Also note, SB, that in your OP the examples you gave are artists that aren't really highly regarded for their talent. I think nowadays people want talent to come with their sex, if sex is going to be there at all. (I do think Miley is talented, but not in the way that mainstream and GP views "talent"). 

And look at it this way - if Adele put out two music videos, one where she was fully clothed and singing and one where she is scantily clad and singing, which one do you think would get more views? 

[Harry 26,836]

20 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I would really appreciate it if you would stop acting like you know me and all my intentions. Quite frankly, I don't think anything will convince you that you've got me all wrong. Every time I try to be nice and civil to you, you don't want to know. I think that you almost want me to be nasty. Well, I hate to disappoint, but I'm just not that kind of person. Lately, I've noticed that you seem to be on the warpath with others as well, so I know it's not just me. Why do you always have a bone to pick with people? Just chill out.

Disagreeing =/= warpath. There's also plenty of instances where I agree with people too. I even liked a post of yours the other day. So stop trying to belittle me.

[Kermit 15,807]

"You gotta eat the booty like groceries" 

[Kermit 15,807]

23 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I would really appreciate it if you would stop acting like you know me and all my intentions. Quite frankly, I don't think anything will convince you that you've got me all wrong. Every time I try to be nice and civil to you, you don't want to know. I think that you almost want me to be nasty. Well, I hate to disappoint, but I'm just not that kind of person. Lately, I've noticed that you seem to be on the warpath with others as well, so I know it's not just me. Why do you always have a bone to pick with people? Just chill out.

Him and a few others on this site but that's all i'm gonna say, ignore them it's not worth it.

[AlphaMonster 1,806]

It sells. I have to study so I could not read all of OP

BUT 

I think the difference between now and before is that internet was not this widely used before.  
Now, people get enough of the "sex" that is being sold at first sight due to internet's overexposure. 
So it does not seem to work as good as once it used to. But it still does.

[StrawberryBlond 14,102]

Just now, Kayla said:

I think things go in phases. Once you let sexiness for the sake of sales go on for so long it loses its value. Similarly, if we enter a span of time where 'classy' singers get all the attention eventually people are going to want something more flashy and we may slip back into the sexual imagery as a dominant force. 

My hope is that we move, someday, into a frame of mind that focuses on the talent of the artist and the genuine expression of the artist instead of selling points. 

EDIT: Also note, SB, that in your OP the examples you gave are artists that aren't really highly regarded for their talent. I think nowadays people want talent to come with their sex, if sex is going to be there at all. (I do think Miley is talented, but not in the way that mainstream and GP views "talent"). 

And look at it this way - if Adele put out two music videos, one where she was fully clothed and singing and one where she is scantily clad and singing, which one do you think would get more views? 

A frequent point made in this thread. It does seem to have some truth to it. The public get bored of everything in music eventually (apart from a live performance that gets them pumped up) but they'll be into it again in a few years. We just seem to be going through a more stripped back, conservative time right now. The most successful music right now has been the tamest I've ever known in my lifetime. It was a different story back when I was younger. It seemed like every song had swearwords and was explicit and we had to hide our listening habits from our parents. But now parents are even having the same music tastes as their kids and they can sing along to it in the car! I've never known a time like this.

I too would like talent to be with teamed with sex appeal too. I think Ariana gets props as a good singer, at least. I've been saying recently that i have no problems with sexuality in music provided the imagery isn't explicit and that there's talent behind it. I think one of the most tiresome things in music is seeing a young girl who can't sing rolling around in a barely there ensemble singing a song someone else wrote for her. So much easier to take when she can actually sing and write. But when she can't do either of these things, why is she even in the profession? I firmly believe that anyone who wants to make money purely based off their looks should become a model, they shouldn't be inflltrating the music charts with a career that is blatantly not suited to them. It would be impossible to become an accountant if you couldn't count but somehow it's possible to become a singer even if you possess no musical talent. I think singing is one of the few jobs in life where you can be terrible but still make money and not get fired.

I'm not actually sure which video would get more views. Because it's Adele, she sells based on name recognition alone, regardless of what she's selling or how she's selling it. People would definitely be disappointed in her if she went sexual, however, and would say she was selling out. Which is so typical - why can't a woman be conservative one day and sexual the next? We're complex beings, we're not fixed stereotypes that never change and we can develop new urges. I thought I Miss You was very sexual, actually, but since she does it in such a classy way (and I'm sure the video would mirror that), she gets away with it without being accused of selling out. That's why I tend to aim more for classy sexuality - it's not as aggressive, is easier to process and results in far greater respect. A lot of men surveyed consider a little black dress, fishnets and heels to be sex on legs and think that the sexiest women are those who leave something to the imagination. 

Just now, Harry said:

Disagreeing =/= warpath. There's also plenty of instances where I agree with people too. I even liked a post of yours the other day. So stop trying to belittle me.

I've seen you be very argumentative with someone recently when they weren't even doing anything wrong, it was just like the arguments we had. Yes, you do agree sometimes but when you don't, you've very vicious and seem to really talk down to people. But I appreciate you for liking something I said - I don't know what is was though because your name wasn't listed in my notifications, it was probably under "1 other." What was it, by the way?

[Harry 26,836]

 

1 hour ago, DominicB said:

Him and a few others on this site but that's all i'm gonna say, ignore them it's not worth it.

Lmao what... Sorry you see it that way I guess

23 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I've seen you be very argumentative with someone recently when they weren't even doing anything wrong, it was just like the arguments we had. Yes, you do agree sometimes but when you don't, you've very vicious and seem to really talk down to people. But I appreciate you for liking something I said - I don't know what is was though because your name wasn't listed in my notifications, it was probably under "1 other." What was it, by the way?

You conveniently ignore whenever I've agreed or done basically anything positive. Now I'm vicious? You're the last one to talk about talking down to people after some of the things you've said to me. It was in the thread about Lana doing the Bond song.

[StrawberryBlond 14,102]

Just now, Harry said:

You conveniently ignore whenever I've agreed or done basically anything positive. Now I'm vicious? You're the last one to talk about talking down to people after some of the things you've said to me. It was in the thread about Lana doing the Bond song.

I didn't ignore it, I actually acknowledged it when I said "yes, you do agree sometimes." You are the one who is conveniently ignoring things. I sometimes think you deliberately ignore them or are blind to them because you don't like me very much. There's no denying that you have a habit of being very mean to people when they disagree with you. Why can't you disagree politely, without resorting to insults and telling the other person that they don't know what they're talking about? Naturally, when this happens, I get defensive. You can't be surprised that you get a negative reception when you treat people like that. You're far more likely to get others to come around to your way of thinking by being nice to them. But thanks for that one acknowledgement - at least our love of Lana is something we can find common ground on. I hope one day we can tolerate each other more. I want to, even if you don't.

[Harry 26,836]

19 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I didn't ignore it, I actually acknowledged it when I said "yes, you do agree sometimes." You are the one who is conveniently ignoring things. I sometimes think you deliberately ignore them or are blind to them because you don't like me very much. There's no denying that you have a habit of being very mean to people when they disagree with you. Why can't you disagree politely, without resorting to insults and telling the other person that they don't know what they're talking about? Naturally, when this happens, I get defensive. You can't be surprised that you get a negative reception when you treat people like that. You're far more likely to get others to come around to your way of thinking by being nice to them. But thanks for that one acknowledgement - at least our love of Lana is something we can find common ground on. I hope one day we can tolerate each other more. I want to, even if you don't.

Yes I do agree sometimes? That implies I have to agree with everything all or most of the time in order to fit your bill. What is that? You followed that up by saying that when I don't I'm 'vicious' which is quite the accusation. An untrue one at that.

Idk why you're talking down to me like I'm some kind of monster that everyone hates. If we're now talking about people agreeing with us and personal reactions, I'd like to point out the numbers beneath our usernames.

[StrawberryBlond 14,102]

16 hours ago, Harry said:

Yes I do agree sometimes? That implies I have to agree with everything all or most of the time in order to fit your bill. What is that? You followed that up by saying that when I don't I'm 'vicious' which is quite the accusation. An untrue one at that.

Idk why you're talking down to me like I'm some kind of monster that everyone hates. If we're now talking about people agreeing with us and personal reactions, I'd like to point out the numbers beneath our usernames.

No, by saying that, I meant you're not always a disagreeable person. I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with others as long as you do it politely and you rarely do. Maybe you don't see your behaviour as a problem but plenty of other people do. It's good to listen to other people's views of you as they can find flaws that you don't see in yourself and you can change.

I didn't say everyone hates you but you aren't always the easist person to get along with. And really? You're basing it on like points? I didn't say anything about that, so why would you think I was judging things based on that? It's not about how many likes you've got, it's how many people genuinely like you. Some people just have lower points than others even though they're perfectly liked, it's just one of those things. Those who are always online will have more points, obviously.