Posted by the Editor on Aug 9, 2010 in Kali | 1 comment
But I like the song. I like it because it deals with issues normally kept behind closed doors. The very act of calling it domestic violence removes it from society, takes the responsibility away from anyone else who could help the situation. It isolates both the victim and the abuser.
In reality of course, the state does have a responsibility to protect people from those that harm them. Unfortunately this requires funding, which Theresa May has decided just can’t be spared right now. So money that could save peoples’ lives is apparently needed more elsewhere.
I also like the song because it deals with both peoples’ experiences within the relationship. Too often (I did it in the previous paragraph) abusive relationships are neatly divided into victim and abuser- when in reality it’s a lot more complex. I’m not saying women who are routinely beaten by their husbands, or vice versa, are asking for it; but every situation is different, and in some, both people can be equally aggressive and volatile. Men however, tend to be physically stronger, and as such, are more likely to be able to inflict greater damage than the other way around.
Whilst in the video Megan Fox comes across as a relatively independent and able woman, the lyrics Rhianna sings are vague and don’t give the impression that she (her character) is particularly pro-active. We don’t really learn about her experience- whereas Eminem’s extensive verses provide us with insight into why- if it can be justified at all- his character is violent. It seems to come down to the old “I love her too much” excuse. This is why I don’t like the song. Because his parts of the song are so much longer, and Rhianna’s are just repetitive, it’s almost like Eminem is wanting us to sympathise with the abuser,- as if his story is worth more than his girlfriend’s.
Another thing I wanted to add is about the allegations that the video “glamourises” domestic violence. When I first watched it I disagreed with this- it just seemed the standard Mary Whitehouse moral panic backlash. But then I read these comments on Claire’s blog. One of them says
“This is the glorification of domestic violence like high fashion is the glorification of starvation blah blah blah…
Their chemistry was off the charts! I bet the sex is so good. Holy s**t.”
If ever a statement was self-contradictory? Yeah. So let’s start with the analogy. I love fashion but come on, everyone knows about the body issues that surround the industry. Impressionable, self-conscious people growing up absorbing campaign after campaign full of waifs…yeah, that actually is a pretty big deal, I think.
And then the idea that a violent relationship = amazing chemistry = incredible sex. Je-sus. I don’t even know how to address this. It trivialises the entire topic, undermines so much of what people go through in these tragic, often life-threatening relationships, and actually steps on sexual abuse and rape issues.
When I watched the video, I didn’t think how good the sex these people have together must be. Is that strange, that I didn’t? Or that other people did? I know this post is different to what I normally blog about, but it’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot, especially with the news of Theresa May’s spending cuts. I’d really love to know what you all think about it.
Now he should consider making one showing that nearly half the batterers are women. Such as the Major League Baseball Pitcher who was beaten on by his girlfriend, a super model, while driving in their car on a California freeway at the same time it was happening to Rihanna. I guess it male victims don’t make all the news. It was just a back page story in the LA Times.
Annette’s Story: The Other Face Of Domestic Violence
http://TheOtherFaceOfDomesticAbuse-Annettes-Story.org