Using female soft porn to try to sell and save the dying Classical Music tradition with its greying audience, and apparently many females today don’t mind being seen as a sex object.
Hola a todos. You might be wondering, “Who’s that cocktail pianist sitting at the Steinway & Sons grand piano below in that skimpy green dress?”
Well, she’s not a cocktail pianist and I suspect she would resent being called that, although one might get the impression that’s what she is. What she’s wearing is her performance attire for when she plays the Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 1 in b flat minor, Op. 23, for example. You might be asking: She wears that when she performs with a major symphony orchestra? Yes, she does indeed. That dress looks a bit constricting to perform in, especially something like a demanding piano concerto. As a pianist, I prefer roomier clothes for performing in. Although considering there’s very little dress there, there would seem to be little chance of her getting over-heated, unless her name is Rose. Rose gets over-heated. But no, this pianist’s name is not Rose. This female is a concert artist in the Classical Music field, and apparently she and or her concert management think it’s a good idea to use soft porn to try to market her as a sex object in an attempt to save the slowly dying Classical Music field and her related performances. It would also appear that the now-dead feminist movement had little to no bearing on the Classical Music field’s sexist traditions. This is a type of sexist marketing gimmick and apparently any controversy over her — meaning the sexed-up/sex object way she’s dressed for a performance — is seen as a positive thing by her artist management because the bottom line is that it gives her attention, or that’s the impression one gets. My guess is that this gimmick is coming from artist management in collaboration with the artist.
This “sex her up” marketing gimmick doesn’t seem to be drawing in the crowds since many orchestras especially in the non-United States are programming anything but time-honoured classical repertoire as audiences decline. They’re programming a lot of “fluff” stuff instead for the sheeple. I wrote about that in this article: We’re Down to The Big Three. In the case of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra (BSO), one wonders how much longer they will be around. BSO management cancelled the Orchestra’s 2019 Summer Season.
You know why this is happening, don’t you? In part, it’s happening because there’s little to no music and arts programmes in the US public schools any more for students to be exposed to Classical Music. To give a more complete picture of the state of things one needs to look at funding: Most recently as of this writing, the “Democrats” and Republicans in the US Congress are pouring a record amount of dinero/money into the bottomless pit known as the Pentagon, at the request of Mr Non-Interventionist Interventionist (the current White House occupant). Yes, the so-called “Democrats” in the House of Representatives in the US Congress the week of 21 July 2019 voted in the majority — including White House-enabler Nancy Pelosi and fake-progressive Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — to give the current White House occupant his requested $1.74 TRILLION dollars budget, most of that for the US Military Industrial Complex Killing Machine. Also, half of what’s known as “The (Progressive) Squad” — which consists of four non-White females that the White House occupant has trolled-bullied in recent weeks — in the House of Representatives voted for this obscene bill. So it has become apparent that two members of “The Squad” are fake-progressives. I was suspect of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from the beginning especially after she started snuggling up with the White House occupant’s main enabler, Nancy “He’s not worth impeachment” Pelosi. Then, in 2020, after he gets back in one way or the other for a second term, Nancy “he’s not worth it” Pelosi will say, “As I said during his first term, there will be no impeachment hearings. I own the US Constitution. The voters — who vote on a corrupt system — have now spoken and they want him to have a second term, and perhaps more. (Several times he’s talked about not leaving after a second term). And to be quite honest, I look forward to working with him for another four years-plus. He’s really quite a nice guy. We get along splendidly although I try not to show that on camera so that my gullible and partisan-brainwashed voters in San Francisco will continue to vote for me in lockstep of around 78% of the vote each ‘election’ cycle based on my name-recognition.” These “Democratic” corporatist basura in the House of Representatives couldn’t find it within themselves to put $1-2 billion into music education in the US public schools? Good heaven’s no! Wouldn’t dream of! The non-United States is not that type of nation. Then, when that budget bill reached the Senate, the “Democrats” led the passage of the budget in the Senate that includes a record $738 billion for the military. The budget was an agreement between White House enabler-Pelosi and the current White House occupant, reflecting so-called bipartisan support for the US Empire War Machine. It’s
interesting most hypocritical that the current White House occupant campaigned on being a non-interventionist, yet every day he’s intervening, bullying, intervening, policing, intervening, and sticking his nose in someone else’s business around the planet. Senate Democrats gave far more support to the White House occupant’s and Pelosi’s budget than Republicans, voting for it by 38-5, with four absent. Why were they absent? Republicans divided much more closely, 30 in favour of and 23 against, and one absent. Republicans were not opposed to the record spending on the military but objected to the level of spending for domestic social programmes and the overall deficit. If the “Democrats” had voted against the budget by any large margin, the budget would have been defeated. In reality, the “Democrats” are the current White House occupant’s biggest enablers.
Also, there really should be a law that’s adhered to that says that any Senator or Representative must be present for all votes in the Senate or House, respectively. When they’re out campaigning for another job/office they’re not doing their job as a Senator or Representative. Why did Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, as two examples, run for the Senate when obviously neither really didn’t want to be senators since they are both relatively new to their 6-year term in the Senate, and are already running for another office? At least Harris and Booker have legal training and a law degree (Juris Doctorate) as opposed to Dianne Feinstein who comes with no legal training and with her Bachelor of Arts degree in a completely unrelated field. Nancy Pelosi also has no legal training and no law degree. Her Bachelor of Arts is in Political Science. Related: Representatives and Senators in the US Congress should have law degrees. How can one be called a “lawmaker” and be making laws for a nation without a law degree or any legal training? Making laws with a Bachelor of Arts degree. That’s insane. In any other job that I can think of, the person has to come with some background or training — highest educational background — in that area of specialty that they’re applying for. But with these “lawmakers” there’s no requirements other than an age requirement and being a US citizen. What pathetically lame requirements. The same for the White House occupant. Any piece of wealthy trash can run for that office, and they have!; see the current state of affairs. No wonder we’re in such a dismal situation with these basura running things. There should be a law that is adhered to that a senator has to complete one six-year term before openly gallivanting around running for another office. So, of the seven “Democratic” senators running for president in 2020, four of them did not bother to show up to vote on the budget bill I mentioned earlier, including Bernie Sanders, who said during one of the “Democratic” Party so-called debates that he would vote against the record military budget. That was a lie because he didn’t even show up to cast his vote on that. He was out campaigning, not doing his job in the Senate. Neither did Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker. Three “Democratic” presidential candidates did return to the US Capital building on Capital Hill in the District of Columbia to vote. One of them, Kirsten Gillibrand, voted for the war budget. Does she pretend to be a “progressive?” Michael Bennet and Amy Klobuchar voted against it. Again, clearly, the “Democrats” are the current White House occupant’s biggest enablers.
I should point out that genuine progressives do not vote for war, death and killing funding or for funding for concentration camps at la frontera/the border between los Estados Unidos y México/between the United States and México.
But this lack of music education in US public schools and lack of funding at the US federal level — as I pointed out in the paragraph above — is also why the Classical Music field has such a lack of diversity within because when people of all ethnic backgrounds are not exposed to something, they can’t possibly acquire an interest in it or cultivate some hidden talents they have. For example, Baltimore’s majority population is Black. Yet the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra has only ONE Black musician. As I’ve written before: If most people spent as much time practising a musical instrument that they really like and enjoy as they do wasting their life away “practising” their phone (the world’s #1 distraction devise), we’d have a remarkably different society. (Related: Diversity critical to survival of classical music field).
But back to this concert attire I was talking about, which is mainly the topic of this article. As for the pianist sitting over here on the right wearing — what little there is of — a white dress, give the thing a glance and tell me she isn’t revved up for sex? Boobs stuck out as far as possible. With her back firmly arched where she has to hold on to the piano bench with her right hand, can she stick her chest out any more? The woman seems to be absolutely obsessed with her chest. What is she aiming for with those protruded breasts? Is she trying to push her breasts into the next room? Imagine if a male pianist was sitting there without a shirt on with his chest stuck out? But we’re not likely to see that are we? No.
We were having a conversation the other day in the Conservatory about this topic, this double standard, this hypocrisy regarding the sexism involved in concert performance attire for female soloists (vocal and instrumental) in Classical Music performances.
I asked some of the students: Have you noticed that most female soloists come out on stage with bare shoulders, bare arms, deep cleavage and bare breasts showing (except for the ever-feared and forbidden nipple that humans aren’t supposed to see according to the prudes)? These females make sure that most of their upper body is naked or exposed. Why? Why are females so obsessed with their upper body? At this point, I guess we need a nudity ban for the Concert Hall stage, no?
What is with this bare upper body thing that many females have?
Yet if a guy did the same thing, he would probably be jeered off the stage and told he was under-dressed inappropriately and told to go home and change appropriately in a conservative suit or tux. This is such a double-standard.
And is the non-diverse “greying audience” (as it’s known) really into soft porn when they’re there for a performance? Not that I can tell. The “greying audience” is generally more conservative, I think. (Although I do see a bit more diversity in the audience in Frankfurt; quite a few Asians enjoy the superb hr-Sinfonieorchester – Frankfurt Radio Symphony).
But my sense is that the “greying audience” would not necessarily appreciate this half-naked cheap marketing gimmick and would see it for what it is and ask: “Who is she trying to bait here being up there on the stage half-naked and boobs nearly fully exposed and the entire back missing from her dress? What’s wrong with her? Is she here for sex or for a musical performance?” Perhaps both.
One does wonders, at this rate of willing sexual exploitation of an artist, will some female artist — perhaps one or more of the females pictured on this page — be offering a strip-tease show, pole dancing and oral sex between the movements of a concerto in the future? Well, if it sells tickets I suppose we can expect that too, no? But again, I don’t see audiences drawn to this gimmick, other than some young males (based on their U-toob comments) and those guys wouldn’t be there in the Concert Hall in the first place. Or, for an exorbitantly priced concert ticket (and seats are limited!), these females willing to be exploited might offer a “A Special Night” (oooooooh, steamy, that’s hot!) after the performance for those who want to go to the Green Room for “An Erotic Night With the Artist” along with the current White House occupant as he repeatedly forces himself onto her with kisses and repeated puzzy grabbing. He will also announce which person or group in the world will be the subject of his juvenile taunting, bullying and intervening for the day.” The additional promotion for this event in the Green Room will likely read: “You’ll see it all as she sits and lies in various provocative positions on top of a grand piano. Order now because seats are limited!” This could likely be the graphic for the promotion:
I found this. It’s presumably a promotion for a performance of Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 1 in C, Op. 15
Now that’s tacky. No one should be sitting on or sprawled-out on a piano. There doesn’t seem to be any standards now. That’s what happens when one plays to the lowest common denominator.
This soft porn scheme doesn’t seem to be attracting young people to the audience based on the audiences I see in performances. The thing is: Young people can see reams and reams of “pretty girls” on their phones without having to pay for an expensive concert ticket just to go hear a piano concerto that they have absolutely no interest in just to see one “pretty girl play the piano” half-naked.
Nudity is not the topic. The double-standard is: the inequality between the genders in performance attire.
To be clear, I have no problem with nudity and seeing the human body. We were all born nude. I opposed San Francisco’s City-Wide Nudity Ban — and I strongly supported the few (it was about 4 at any given time) naked guys who walked around San Francisco’s Castro occasionally at that time, in part, because The Castro had a long history of nudity on occasion — when that ban was needlessly installed by a disgusting conservative gay political opportunistic prude who moved here from New Jersey to appeal to his conservative San Francisco base, including what had become the conservative so-called “gay community.” I watched in disgust as many conservative queers bullied, made fun of and hated on the naked guys.
And nudity and seeing the human body is not the point of this article.
The point of this article is to talk about the sexism and male chauvinism in the Classical Music field.
There is such a glaring double-standard when it comes to concert attire and other duplicitous traditions of the field for that matter. I’ve previously written about many of them. This hypocrisy is often promoted by the group I refer to as the Classical Music Snots, who so often ruin Classical Music for a lot of people. They are most often conservative prudes and self-appointed know-it-all authorities, wannabe musicians, and nit-picking armchair critics. I can’t stand them, the basura.
I saw a performance recently featuring a Symphony Orchestra and Chorus (the Chorus was superb) and trebles (boy choristers). The soprano soloist was barely wearing anything over her chest other than to cover up her nipples, and the trebles who were part of this performance were sitting up above her in the tiers. I looked at the trebles as she was on the stage and not a one of them were looking at her. In other words, the trebles/boys were not phased by seeing what was essentially a naked female. Yet the prudes among us in San Francisco and elsewhere — any other time — would have screamed “WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?!!!!” She can’t be on stage like that. Cover her up. Children are not supposed to be exposed to nudity.”
Bottom Line: Children are being used as the excuse for immature adults who have a problem with nudity and seeing the human body, perhaps even their own. Many of these people would likely say that their Christian deity created the human body. Really? So you’re saying that “he” created something “bad” and “off-putting” and that human eyes should not see? I suspect these basura have never thought about that. Critical thinking skills are not their strong point. The same people have no problem with “the children” seeing any violent programming on television or anywhere else that comes along. Violence seems to be perfectly acceptable to these conservative trash. Violence is good for children to see, but seeing the human body/two nipples that their “lord and saviour” allegedly created is not good. That’s the thinking of the conservative prudes. Makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it? [sarcasm intended].
In reality, it’s not the children who have a problem with nudity, not that they even noticed, which again, none of the boys did in that performance I watched. It’s the adult children — the adult prudes — the children in adult bodies who have never matured to adulthood regardless of their chronological age and who have body image issues, and have a problem with seeing the human body.
I couldn’t help but think about this topic when I saw this performance from the EU. And yes I know that some Europeans take a more mature approach to nudity than the puritanical, prudish and ultra-conservative non-United States. But there are some prudes in the EU. I’m well aware of that. One example: They whinge about the urinals on the streets in Paris that guys use. Well, some of the guys likely have BPH and need to urinate frequently which these urinals help them with. Good. But the female prudes scream (who often become prudes the moment they become a parent), “But that urinal is at the eye level of my child.” So? Your child has never seen a penis before perra, including his own penis? Well, s/he will definitely be in for a shock one day at this rate with you as a parent. Some people really should not be parents because they lack the maturity to be a good parent, often merely passing along bad generational prudish and outdated conservative parenting methods, the way they were parented. I’ve also seen many people become absolute prudes the moment they became a parent, forgetting their own past.
Apparently some orchestras are not prepared for these sexed-up performances because I’ve seen some covert disapproving looks among musicians when the half-naked female artists come on stage as if the orchestral musicians were asking, “WTF is she wearing?” when the artist arrives at the piano or near the podium? “That’s what she wears for a performance or does she have some hot date afterwards?”
I’ve watched countless performances where the female soloist(s) comes out half naked in some low-cut or extremely low-cut gown, or the top half essentially gone. She almost looks like a mermaid in that particular style of dress she’s wearing as the lower half is this tight fabric that wraps around her and cleans the stage floor as she walks. Why doesn’t she order a bit shorter gown or is the intent to have the gown drag on the stage as she shuffles in that tight get-up from the stage door to her chair and back? You’ve probably seen the “look” I’m talking about. This is not the image I had in mind, I can’t find that particular gown for some reason, but this will do for now as an example right here.
These females come out wearing barely anything at all that covers her top half (along as no nipples are showing because we all know how dreadful it is to see a human being’s nipples, don’t we? And no one has ever seen a human nipple before, correct?). She’s struts out or shuffles out showing deep cleavage and is “sexed-up.” I think that’s the intent of this silly phenomenon.
In piano concerto performances where the female piano artist wears a get-up like the female pictured above, the comments under the video performance usually lead to the juvenile male commenters — with their high school jock mentality who never matured — to write such comments as, “I’d like to do her” and “look at those boobs, look at those legs” and other comments of that nature. As well as the occasional, “Will you marry me?” where a male commenter is presuming the sexual orientation of the female pianist whom he knows absolutely nothing about. No comment is made about her performance of course. Such sexual comments are never written about male classical performers.
Then the male soloists come out on stage all covered up like a monk from head to toe. Can you imagine the looks that a male soloist would get if he came out wearing an upscale tank top or something barely covering his chest like these females do? Or a dress shirt unbuttoned so that he looks “sexed up?” Even if his “off-putting” nipples were not showing! Gasp! No, the male performers must be covered up so that not any “skin” is showing other than his face and hands, and possibly his neck.
Male performers are really at a disadvantage here because they’re not allowed to be half naked and “sexed up.” But clearly females are allowed to look like floozies and like “Ladies of the Night” and that’s perfectly acceptable, it seems.
And then some of the female artists do an outdated, subservient sexist curtsy to the audience rather than bow the way all the other performers do. I think females who curtsy to the audience do so thinking that it will generate more applause for them. “Well if my performance doesn’t get much applause or as much as I think it should, maybe my subservient curtsy will!” Could someone remind me what the feminist movement accomplished when it was active?
The burning question here is: Why is a male’s chest so off-putting to people, or the male body in general for that matter? A female’s chest is apparently appealing just because her breasts protrude out and a guy’s breasts don’t. That makes a difference to people? Yes is the answer to that question. Well, it’s how our society has been brainwashed with body image issues. That’s what it amounts to.
I’m not the first person to notice this “sexed up” gimmick. Here’s an article about this fad written back in 2017 by Aliette de Laleu. She is a journalist on the radio station France Musique. Her article appears on the ClassicFM website. ClassicFM is in the UK:
A conductor has noticed how many females are dressing for performances. (How could they not notice?) Unfortunately, in Aliette de Laleu’s article, she makes no comparison to the fact that guys are not allowed to dress “half naked” or however they want.
From her article:
“Aliette argues that while opera stars and performers wear brightly coloured clothing to bring drama to their performance, orchestral musicians and instrumentalists are restricted to dark colours and ‘non-distracting’ clothes.”
Ms de Laleu also said in her article that if you don’t like seeing the female pianist — half naked — to “close your eyes.” I would like to point out to her that one does not pay a lot of money for a concert ticket to a performance to sit there with one’s eyes closed, understood? One might as well be sitting at home listening to a CD if you’re going to be sitting in a Concert Hall with your eyes closed. What a dense thing to say. What is wrong with the woman?! It’s fine if she wants to stoop to the level of defending this cheap marketing gimmick, but please engage at least the most basic of critical thinking skills rather than make some glib “close your eyes” remark.
And I don’t find it “distracting” per se. That’s not the word I would use. I’m not into looking at half-naked females playing a piano concerto or serving as a vocal soloist-screamer showing mammary glands, if a guy cannot wear a tank top or no shirt all, which is what it amounts to. Why can’t a guy show his mammary glands? After all, what is equal for females should be equal for guys and vice versa.
For those who might say from a position of willful-ignorance, “Oh come now, guys don’t have mammary glands.” FYI: “All male and female mammals have mammary glands, which is the organ that produces milk. When mammary glands mature fully in females during puberty, they develop into a state where a hormonal spike — most notably of prolactin — can easily induce lactation. For males, the gland generally doesn’t mature to that level.
Here’s an example of the forbidden male body (flute soloist below) all covered up in ubiquitous and drab black and grey. Yet the “sexed-up” piano accompanist can look like she’s already for bed, or something:
Tuxes — which fortunately the flautist pictured above is not wearing — are so “last year,” stuffy and hot. And predictable. So tiresome. Now if it were a hot guy (meaning my type) wearing a tank top or an open and pretty dress shirt or less, and cargo shorts or even a Speedo, I’ll be glad to watch him play the same concerto. I’d prefer he be dressed like that. Casually in other words. But of course we’re not likely to see that EVER. And again, I’m not sure who came up with this new half-naked fad, whether it was the artist or the artist management. I can sort of suspect that it was the desperate artist management who said to the artist: “You know, you’ll sell a lot more tickets and be much more controversial if you dress as we’re suggesting: Half naked. So sex-up your performance. You might want to consider having a boob job as well. Why don’t you consider enlarging your breasts to fit a bra size of a Triple Z? Think about it.”
Oh that’s another thing: I’ve noticed when a small group picture of musicians is taken with arms around each other, that the guy standing next to a nearly-naked female doesn’t seem to know where to put his hand or arm on her. It’s as if his brain tells him, “Don’t touch her bare skin on her arm or chest with your hand. That could give her a wrong message. Put your arm down near her waist where some fabric is, what little there is.”
Or take that female in that black 2-strap thing in the video I’ve linked to above from ClassicFM. Is she excessively warm sitting there in that studio? Is that why she’s wearing this low-cut black thing showing bare shoulders and chest? Again, what is it with females that they feel it’s all about their chest and boobs that they must constantly show, that they can legally get by with showing without getting arrested for nudity? I don’t quite understand some female’s obsession and fixation with their chest and arms. Their upper body in other words.
As of this writing, I’ve been unable to find that wrap-around evening gown I was talking about earlier. I don’t know what it’s called, but nothing comes up with anyone wearing it. It must not be that popular although I’ve seen women wear it in performances. They almost look like a mermaid, but that’s not the name of it apparently.
Fortunately, I’ve not seen any female conductors wearing these get-ups. They don’t try to “sex up” their conducting performances by “showing skin.” They allow their musicianship to be the selling criteria. But with these half-naked females, it’s as if they’re saying, “Well, if I can’t wow them with my performance, maybe I’ll wow them by showing as much skin as legally allowed, without getting arrested for ‘indecency.'”
Then you have Ms Boobs here as the guys are performing covered up from head to toe in conservative stuffy tuxes:
I think I would feel a bit self-conscious wearing something like that for a performance. I’m hesitant to wear anything colourful in San Francisco today because of the nasty, disapproving looks I get because I’m not conforming by wearing black and grey like everyone else here, the sheeple. Mi amigo/My friend tells me the same. He wears tie-dye on occasion and he said you wouldn’t believe the stares and glares he gets of disapproval when he wears any colour. San Francisco is such a different (and conservative) City now than the Old City that we were known for around the world. When he wears black and grey, he gets no stares. So I can’t imagine what it would feel like to wear a dress like she’s wearing for a performance with boobs fully exposed. I think I would have trouble keeping my mind on my performance. But apparently she and her boobs adore the attention. I guess she does a deep bow at the end of her performance so that those in the Orchestra seating can get a good view, since they paid a higher ticket cost. Hopefully her boobs don’t fall out, although upon reflection, when a female puts that much work into them, one would think that she does hope they fall out, no? She might say: “These things help me sell tickets.” To which I would ask: Really? Why is that, when people can see them for free online? Or do you allow concert-goers to touch them when they greet you after the performance as they’re talking with you but staring down at your boobs?
And again — this cannot be overstated — I wouldn’t have any problem with this if the guys were allowed the same freedom to dress as they want. But the reality is that they’re not. The guys are supposed to look very drab and conservative.
And before someone says, “All those guys in the Orchestra must be distracted by her boobs. It must turn them on while they’re trying to play their instruments.” No, No, No. Please! Stop it! Stop your ignorance! One should make no assumptions about the sexual orientation of the orchestral musicians. Do not make the usual heteronormative mistake and assume that all musicians are straight/heterosexual just because you may be. They’re not. So no, the queer/gay male musicians in the Orchestra would have no interest in this woman’s boobs or anything else about her other than her music, and there are many gay musicians in orchestras and throughout The Arts in general. I feel the need to say this because I get so tired of people making baseless heteronormative comments and baseless assumptions about people’s sexuality when they know absolutely nothing about them. I won’t have it!
Or take this example. If she can come out looking like this:
Then why can’t a guy dress like this guy immediately below? At least his forbidden mammary glands are completely covered. Yes, you have to watch those mammary glands because our prudish society has a terrible time with mammary glands. But again, they will tell you that their god created them. Hmmmmm. So, what they’re saying is that your god created something bad that one should not look at? I guess they’ve never thought of that.
If females are allowed to wear the skimpy get-ups they wear, why can’t a guy wear this?:
Or even this version:
Or maybe this:
This example below implies that the requirement for female pianists is this top-naked look, although that dress sort of looks like a white wedding dress at the bottom, doesn’t it?:
I do not know what it is about boobs and classical music. That escapes me.
I’m well aware that in the pop music culture in the non-United States that they use anything — no matter how tacky and dumbed-down it is — to “sell” the “product” (meaning the female singer) to the audience. And I think the male performers in the pop music culture have to be all covered up just like they are in the Classical Music field. I was noticing that when I was watching Univisión and Telemundo. I even commented on how the Latino artists used to perform in unbuttoned shirts showing their chests. But that changed. The last time I checked the Latino singers had every button on their shirt buttoned up to their chin, looking very conservative compared to the past. So seeing what I’ve described in this article about the Classical Music field is not at all new to the pop music culture. Again, it would appear that the Classical Music field is adopting similar marketing gimmicks to try to “save Classical Music.” Good luck with that! I just don’t see that working because the Classical Music audience is a completely different audience than that of the pop music culture which is mostly young and high-pitched screaming “teeny boppers.” Apparently no one has considered that we’re talking about two very different audiences. The pop music culture audience is nothing like the Classical Music audience from what I’ve observed from both.
So add this article’s content to the long list of the hypocrisies and double-standards in the (sexist) Classical Music tradition.
I just wanted to point out this double-standard, hypocrisy and to also point out that sexism is still very much with us in the Classical Music field. And in today’s draconian political climate, many things are going backwards — including the increasing return of the sexist language “mankind” instead of “humankind,” the latter which has been used since at least the late 1970s up until recently — so I expect little to nothing to change in a genuinely progressive sense in the Classical Music field because of this.
Here are some other images I found to give you an idea of what I’m talking about:
I guess this female concert pianist over here on the right is interested in having people talk to her boobs rather than to her directly. I guess people are supposed to greet her with, “Halo, nice rack.” I mean, she’s gone out of her way to deliberately “present” her boobs to us for a reason, so she obviously wants people to gawk at them or stare at them while talking with her. What is with females and their absolute obsession, fixation and addiction over their breasts? I don’t understand this. Can you imagine if a male concert pianist showed up similarly with just black pants on and no shirt? Or a shirt on but unbuttoned to show his chest? Or a shiek/stylish tank top? There is such inequality between the genders in this regard.
This extreme obsession that many females have with their upper body is to a point where one might suggest they need some intensive psychotherapy frankly to see what is really going on in their head in this regard.
Or, are all of these bare-chest females trying to cater to people’s sexist view of women as a sex object? If so, they’re doing a splendid job of that and it would seem that we’ve accomplished little in the way of eradicating sexism, especially in the Classical Music field.
And based on the Male Patriarchy behaviour — him-tall-dominant, her-short-submissive (from what I’ve read about this it’s mostly her head trip) where he looks like he’s making out with his little daughter having to lean way over and down just to get to her lips — that I see from Millennial breeder couples in San Francisco and anywhere else I look for that matter, I can safely say that, yes, we have accomplished very little in this regard as a society. Chau.—el barrio rosa