here.]
New York Daily News columnist Sherryl Connelly lashed out at Britney and Christina Aguilera in a rambling, unfocused rant that charges Britney and Christina with having failed as role models to a generation of girls. This column is an embarrassing example of female cattiness and sanctimonious grandstanding. [Click the picture to read it, or click here.]
It's not surprising that some of Britney's peers might show their claws. Sadly, in our culture, it's to be expected that girls are each others' own worst enemies. But it's incredible that Britney (and Christina!) so threaten a woman old enough to be their grandmother that she would devote a whole column to castigating them.
I don't know about you, but I'm impressed.
Girlpower? What's that? Some people have been griping in the guestbook and elsewhere on the 'net that Britney has done harm to "girlpower" with her sexy image. Nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, there is no such THING as "girlpower." The word "girlpower" was a marketing ploy invented to sell Spice Girls merchandise. Britney embodies the strong, independent young woman. She has been working (because she wanted to) for almost ten years. As far as I'm concerned, she can write her own ticket now. And that includes wearing whatever she wants.
Is Britney A Poor Role Model? According to the Star (yes, that supermarket tabloid), the mothers of some of Britney's younger fans are up in arms because they feel that (again... yawn) because of Britney's choice of clothing and her "provocative" dance numbers in her shows, and the fact that she didn't wear a bra in the Niclelodeon Kids' Choice Awards show, she is a poor role model for their ten- and eleven-year-old daughters. What do I think? I think that these mothers are overreacting. What possible bad thing could happen as a result of young girls looking up to Britney? Probably the very worst thing is that a bunch of ten- and eleven-year-old girls won't wear bras. These mothers ought to be thankful that their progeny aren't emulating Marilyn Manson, or - worse still - someone like Courtney Love.
More backlash! People continue to send me e-mails and sign the guestbook telling me that it's wrong not to be upset by Britney's scandalous ways. They tell me the girl is wrong, wrong, wrong. Britney is hurting ten-year-olds, Britney is hurting three-year-olds, Britney is - Hold it! Stop! Just one cotton pickin' minute, here! Are you folks forgetting something? Britney is an entertainer! She is not supposed to appear at her concerts in gunnysack pinafores and penny loafers! As for people who complain that Britney's "target audience" is ten- and eleven-year-old girls, I beg your pardon, but Britney's target audience is young adults.
Britney Spears shares the same target audience as Jennifer Lopez (who appears on billboards in her underwear throughout the entire New York City subway system), Brandy and Monica (whose video appears to condone all kinds of living arrangements), TLC, who wear far less fabric than Britney, Mariah Carey - and have you seen the cover of Mariah's latest single? And are these young ladies having Bibles shaken in their faces? Not hardly. Not nearly as much as Big Bad Britney is, at any rate.
But you know what? You can never satisfy this kind of complainer. There will always be something to complain about. If Britney had remained as thin as she was when her CD was first released, by now everyone would be whining that she was causing girls to have a poor body image or promoting "heroin chic." If she didn't shave under her arms like Paula Cole or Julia Roberts, every disc jockey would be talking about it from here till the millennium. When you're a girl, you can't escape the grumbling of the harshest critics. And when you're a pretty girl and a successful entertainer... forget about it!
I hereby continue to respectfully disagree with Britney's critics. I don't think you could find a more wholesome entertainer if you tried.
