The super-cool mega-amazing singer that is Rihanna released the video for her new (and fucking awesome) single Man Down just the other day. As well as being visually stunning, it tells a compelling story. Shot in Jamaica, the first scene shows Rihanna shooting a man in a train station. A day earlier, the viewers are prompted; Rihanna visited a club and danced with a man. Things became more heated, but she firmly pushed him away, telling him “no”. She left the club sometime later, only for the same man to approach her from behind. After a struggle, it is implied that he raped her. Following the attack, she flees home, where she takes a gun and seeks the ultimate Thelma-&-Louise-style revenge.
The video can be viewed below. Some people may find it upsetting and potentially triggering so viewer discretion is advised.
The video has sparked controversy, mainly for its depiction of violence. I find it unsettling that people are shelving the rape and instead choosing to protest at the shooting; “How dare she condone murder?”; “Promoting violence as a solution to violence is wrong”; “Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children?”. I find these analyses quite weak and hysterical. People who watch this video aren’t going to go on to shoot rapists (not that that would be a terrible loss), and it’s not going to increase someone’s capacity for rapist-killing. People won’t take this video literally as no-one is that suggestible. Rihanna is merely cinematising one of the many reactions a rape victim is wholly entitled to feel following their attack.
Some victims will have feelings of revenge and anger, just as some will have feelings of shame or guilt or shock. I sure as hell would not dispute a rape victim being allowed to have payback fantasies, and wanting to cause their rapist the same harm he’s brought upon them. To go through something so dehumanising as rape is something those of us lucky enough not to be victims of will ever be able to comprehend, and we have no right to tell a rape victim that they are morally deranged or wicked for wanting to see their rapist dead.
The controversy also has underlying racist motives. The media is always quick to demonise music primarily performed by black people (for instance rap, hip-hop, r’n’b and dancehall) for its moral shortcomings, whilst smiling approvingly upon the white musicians who perpetuate the same message. Critics are quick to penalise Odd Future for their misogynistic lyrics (and rightly so), but will turn a blind eye to the rampant sexism in, say, rock music; where groupie culture thrives, and women are categorised in lyrics as either sexy devilish ‘sluts’ or pure and helpless maidens. The same trend applies to violence in lyrics. Was the media up-in-arms following Johnny Cash’s Folsom Prison Blues, where he sings about how he ‘shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die’? Was there nationwide outrage following Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody (‘mama, just killed a man, put a gun against his head, pulled my trigger, now he’s dead’)? No, there was not, despite the facts these lyrics glorify gun culture just as much as any rap song can. Kenny Rogers’ country ballad Coward of the County tells a story almost identical to Rihanna’s; a young boy finds out the girl he loves has been gang-raped, and shoots the perpetrators in an act of vengeance. Yet this song is regarded as a classic, and is not subject to petty complaints from parent councils and reactionary censorship boards. Why? Because the music industry is inherently racist.
The media outrage over the shooting is also distracting people from what should be the real issue in the video, and that is the rape itself. Why are people so quick to scold Rihanna for the shooting, and not the man who rapes her for being a rapist? The shooting is obviously an exaggerated reaction, primarily for theatrical purposes (it’s not as if many rapes end in the rape victim shooting her rapist), but this does not deter from the fact that rape is critically under-punished in society, with conviction rates under 5% in most countries. This is what Rihanna has honourably tried to raise awareness of.
Rihanna - actual feminist icon
Sadly, a lot of the public reaction echoes the media’s out-of-touch attitude. The YouTube comments on the video, for example, are absolutely soul-destroying. There are people trying to make a petty geographical issue out of it; claiming the Jamaican setting is offensive and that Barbados (Rihanna’s home country) sees much more sexual crime. This fickle game of “my country is safer than your country” sorely misses the point. What these people are failing to understand is that rape is endemic in any society and in any culture, and I think this is what Rihanna is trying to say, especially if her Tweets regarding the video are anything to go by:
“Thank you for the amazing response on ManDownVideo I love you guys, and I love that u GOT IT!!! Young girls/women all over the world…we are a lot of things! We’re strong innocent fun flirtatious vulnerable, and sometimes our innocence can cause us to be naïve! We always think it could NEVER be us, but in reality, it can happen to ANY of us! So ladies be careful and #listentoyomama! I love you and I care!”
If you continue amongst the comments, you then arrive at the absolute gutter of victim-blaming; commenters who insist that since Rihanna was “dressed like a slut” and “dancing like a whore”, she has no right to complain when he “merely reacts on impulse” and rapes her. The level of misogyny is really quite outstanding. It makes for a distressing read, and sadly these attitudes are microcosmic of society’s general attitude to rape; blame the victim for getting raped, not the rapist for committing the rape.
Rihanna stuck to her guns, Tweeting: “I’m a 23 year old singer who doesn’t have kids. What’s up with everybody wanting me to be a parent. I’m just a girl, I can only be our voice. We all know it’s difficult and embarrassing to communicate touchy subject matters to anyone, especially our parents. The music industry isn’t “Parent’s ‘R Us.” We have the freedom to make art, let us! It’s your job to make sure your children don’t turn out like us. You can’t hide your kids from society, or they’ll never learn how to adapt. This is the real world!”
When controversy like this arises, it reminds us of why women have far from achieved equality. It reminds us that plenty of people have appalling views regarding rape, and will mock arguments to the contrary because they’re men and they know better. It reminds us why events like Slutwalk and Reclaim the Night are so important to the feminist movement; that attitudes need to be challenged and we cannot suffer in silence any longer. I’d encourage anyone who wants to stand against sexist and apologist bile (like the feedback to this video) to attend a Slutwalk event over the coming months. To find the nearest one to you, check here: http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/satellite.
With that, all I have to say is that Rihanna is a fucking rockstar, and I for one salute her for trying to raise awareness about the nature of rape and sexual violence. Bollocks to the haters.
Nice to know SSY condones Capital punishment for sexual attacks very enlightened of yous.
Rhianna doesn’t do things for art she is a popstar she gets told what to do and to sing a catchy tune. Controversy means you get hype and free publicity then your song sells more it is simples.
You mentioned Johnny Cash yes there was a furore actually because he was treating prisoners like normal people. The racist overtones is of course the easy option. When all arguments fail accuse them of racism and sexism. Well this must be true she is black and a female so of course anybody attacking such a person must be racist and sexist. Ingenius. Will I tell you something I don’t like Barack Obama wow there I said it the man is an idiot but guess what I also hate John McCain the both of them are pricks now that must be hard for your brains to commute so I guess you’ll go for another one of your catch phrases.
I find it laughable that you try so hard not to categorise people that you in fact categorise people. Hilarious keep up the good work.
Now the Lib dems are finished being the pretend morailty police you can maybe take it up as well.
Responses to this video ARE sexist. Why? Because music videos portray rape and violence often, especially in rap culture, where women are frequently objectified and referred to as ‘hos’ and ‘sluts’, and guns are a frequent motif throughtout pop culture: men shoot each other in films and music videos all the time. When these things are being portrayed by male artists we take it in our stride. But when female artists choose to react to the culture of female objectification with violence, outrage ensues, because active violence is not part of the female stereotype: it’s not one of the ‘roles’ that society sells us as acceptable for women. When people object to this video they are objecting – at least in part – to the portrayal of a woman breaking out of the role assigned to her.
Music videos are art, and to say otherwise is simply snobbery. Whether this one was created by Rihanna or by some team of producers/directors is irrelevant: either way it is an aesthetic object consciously created for an audience in order to provoke a reaction. We aren’t condoning capital punishment here, but stating the freedom of art to envision and represent anything. This video is open to all kinds of interpretation: Rihanna (or her video-team) isn’t necessarily saying that men who rape people should be shot (although this is one possible interpretation), but perhaps saying that rape ruins lives as surely as murder does, that rape is as serious an injustice as murder, or that rape should be as intolerable as murder.
We disagree with stereotyping, not categorisation. Categorisation is not necessarily an immoral practice, and is also rather necessary for the practice of political thought. For example, if I say ‘privileged groups include white people, men, westerners, and the upper classes’, I am categorising. This does not mean that I am oppressing.
I do not know why you feel the need to refer to the Lib Dems in a post that has nothing to do with them, or with British Parliamentary politics in general.
There is no question here of us being ‘morality police’ (whatever that means), but this is a political blog, intended to pass comment on political and cultural events from a socialist perspective. This does mean JUDGING, it is a space for us to say what we like, and what we don’t like, and why. Which is a common practice in arts columns, reviews, magazine and newspaper articles, university essays, etc. If that makes us ‘morality police’ then that is what we are, and so are most people, in my experience.
You are part of the British state so to say you are excused from westminister politics is laughable at best not only that but the sight is littered with anti-Tory rhetoric and your main enemy in your eyes are the Condem coalition which is westminister politics.
It could be art but then to say that would be to say that everything is art, that may be true also but at the end of the day the real message is too make money.
To take it as art is good because modern art is used to using controversy to make its self interesting. i.e. a while ago a bible was put in the GOMA and visitors were told they could write in it. This was seen as an insult by many Christians and it was put on the news and gave large publicity thus giving the ‘art piece’ more publicity. So the artists who was young and wanted to be noted done a very clever thing but by helping his own base interest he has offended a lot of be for his own selfishness but then he can appeal to some mysterious being that is art, art is apparently any old tat as long as you claim it to be so.
I do not believe Rhianna or her team had any real concern for the message and considering Rhianna has been a poster girl for the sexuall objectification of humanity I would find it hard to believe she thought the way you do.
No one is saying we are ‘excused’ from westminster politics. I’m saying that commenting on westminster politics on this blog entry is off-topic since this blog entry has nothing to do with westminster politics.
I have neglected to read the rest of your comment since it’s evident that you’re not bothering to read what I’m actually saying, but making up stuff instead.
Bollocks to sexual violence! Bollocks to haters! Bollocks to censorship!
And kudos to Rhianna for taking the shit and awfulness that is rape culture and reclaiming it to make anti-mysogynist art.
And kudos to you writing this.
Nice to know SSY condones Capital punishment for sexual attacks very enlightened of yous.
Rhianna doesn’t do things for art she is a popstar she gets told what to do and to sing a catchy tune. Controversy means you get hype and free publicity then your song sells more it is simples.
You mentioned Johnny Cash yes there was a furore actually because he was treating prisoners like normal people. The racist overtones is of course the easy option. When all arguments fail accuse them of racism and sexism. Well this must be true she is black and a female so of course anybody attacking such a person must be racist and sexist. Ingenius. Will I tell you something I don’t like Barack Obama wow there I said it the man is an idiot but guess what I also hate John McCain the both of them are pricks now that must be hard for your brains to commute so I guess you’ll go for another one of your catch phrases.
I find it laughable that you try so hard not to categorise people that you in fact categorise people. Hilarious keep up the good work.
Now the Lib dems are finished being the pretend morailty police you can maybe take it up as well.
Responses to this video ARE sexist. Why? Because music videos portray rape and violence often, especially in rap culture, where women are frequently objectified and referred to as ‘hos’ and ‘sluts’, and guns are a frequent motif throughtout pop culture: men shoot each other in films and music videos all the time. When these things are being portrayed by male artists we take it in our stride. But when female artists choose to react to the culture of female objectification with violence, outrage ensues, because active violence is not part of the female stereotype: it’s not one of the ‘roles’ that society sells us as acceptable for women. When people object to this video they are objecting – at least in part – to the portrayal of a woman breaking out of the role assigned to her.
Music videos are art, and to say otherwise is simply snobbery. Whether this one was created by Rihanna or by some team of producers/directors is irrelevant: either way it is an aesthetic object consciously created for an audience in order to provoke a reaction. We aren’t condoning capital punishment here, but stating the freedom of art to envision and represent anything. This video is open to all kinds of interpretation: Rihanna (or her video-team) isn’t necessarily saying that men who rape people should be shot (although this is one possible interpretation), but perhaps saying that rape ruins lives as surely as murder does, that rape is as serious an injustice as murder, or that rape should be as intolerable as murder.
We disagree with stereotyping, not categorisation. Categorisation is not necessarily an immoral practice, and is also rather necessary for the practice of political thought. For example, if I say ‘privileged groups include white people, men, westerners, and the upper classes’, I am categorising. This does not mean that I am oppressing.
I do not know why you feel the need to refer to the Lib Dems in a post that has nothing to do with them, or with British Parliamentary politics in general.
There is no question here of us being ‘morality police’ (whatever that means), but this is a political blog, intended to pass comment on political and cultural events from a socialist perspective. This does mean JUDGING, it is a space for us to say what we like, and what we don’t like, and why. Which is a common practice in arts columns, reviews, magazine and newspaper articles, university essays, etc. If that makes us ‘morality police’ then that is what we are, and so are most people, in my experience.
You are part of the British state so to say you are excused from westminister politics is laughable at best not only that but the sight is littered with anti-Tory rhetoric and your main enemy in your eyes are the Condem coalition which is westminister politics.
It could be art but then to say that would be to say that everything is art, that may be true also but at the end of the day the real message is too make money.
To take it as art is good because modern art is used to using controversy to make its self interesting. i.e. a while ago a bible was put in the GOMA and visitors were told they could write in it. This was seen as an insult by many Christians and it was put on the news and gave large publicity thus giving the ‘art piece’ more publicity. So the artists who was young and wanted to be noted done a very clever thing but by helping his own base interest he has offended a lot of be for his own selfishness but then he can appeal to some mysterious being that is art, art is apparently any old tat as long as you claim it to be so.
I do not believe Rhianna or her team had any real concern for the message and considering Rhianna has been a poster girl for the sexuall objectification of humanity I would find it hard to believe she thought the way you do.
No one is saying we are ‘excused’ from westminster politics. I’m saying that commenting on westminster politics on this blog entry is off-topic since this blog entry has nothing to do with westminster politics.
I have neglected to read the rest of your comment since it’s evident that you’re not bothering to read what I’m actually saying, but making up stuff instead.