GENDER Tove Lo and Lady Wood

NB: the artist under discussion often swears in her lyrics and interviews, both of which address her sexual identity in a frank manner.

Lo might be a new low for some, her very in your face lyrics and gyrating in her videos leaving little room for interpretation, but she isn't doing anything new - nor is much of the censorious or dismissive critical reaction, and its grounding in gender politics, new.

Pop writing often ignores great female blues and jazz singers who addressed their sexuality lyrically, and each latest controversy somehow forgets Donna Summers, Madonna, even Alannis Morrisette (whose Jagged Little Pills brought some challenging topics to a huge mainstream audience).

Lo is right to be exasperated at the double standards over male performers, and the issue of agency is central here.

Is her sexualised image and performance a reflection of a patriarchal society and a misogynistic music industry (a traditional feminist stance), and Lo therefore an exploited victim, OR is she an assertive, self-assured woman in control of her image and art freely choosing to explore sexuality (a more typically post-feminist position)?

Perhaps there is some truth in BOTH positions? Lo is asserting female artists' freedom to discourse in a manner seen as male territory and unbecoming for women, thus challenging normative, hegemonic gender identity.

BUT ... she is doing this using visual tropes long linked to the male gaze, and which surely are appealing to a heterosexual male audience as much as generating any identification with or aspiration from (uses and gratifications theory) a female audience?

This is seemingly an endless debate. Going back a decade were the Pussycat Dolls empowering role models or a cynical male manager and record label boss' means of putting a positive spin on an exploitative, sexualised image?

Tove Lo: ‘Being open about sex is not a bad thing’ (Guardian)

Dance, sexism and (postmodern) irony

Two examples here of dance vids (the sub-genre 'house' might be more accurate). On the surface, both are 'blokey' and crudely sexist, framed blatantly around the male gaze.
That seems problematic for the type of music though; intended to be experienced in a club setting as well as on home/personal hi-fi/music player, alienating half an audience would seem boneheaded commercial suicide.
The Danzel vid could be argued to fall between two stools: centred around conventionally galmorous young women BUT with a rather camp chap presenting it all (a judgement well reflected in the comments the vid has attrated on YouTube).
The Alex Gaudino feat. Shena is again a feast of eye candy ... BUT serves this up whilst lampooning the couch potato gamer gents, the very (stereo)type such material conventionally targets. These two are rendered as moronic Beavis and Butthead (returning to our screens after 14 years) facsimiles.
The issue of control is also more subtle, or polysemic, than at first glance. To what extent are our pair of buffoons really in control? Clearly the video employs some of the media language of pornography, but the players are notably skilled, aggressive and competitive; countertypical of the representation we might expect. The referee, far from an alpha male reinforcing any reading of this text as misogynistic or patriarchal, is again made to look foolish, and is a familiar comedy trope (seen often through the career of Bert Kwouk, not least with C4's late-night show Banzai - see the clip below). The whole precept of female players as lads mag 'babes' rather than sportspeople is a further satire of FIFA president Sepp Blatter's notorious suggestion that the women's game should learn from beach volleyball and play in tight hotpants to increase audience interest!
So, are these music videos slices of postmodern irony and satire - with the conventional gaze rendered ridiculous - or just blatant old school sexism with a postmodern fig leaf?
Its notable that there are a good number of 'dislikes' along with the 'likes' on the YouTube pages.