Are the DSU right not to ban Blurred Lines? YES!

Angelina Bishman says YES!

Blurred Lines has been charged by self-proclaimed feminists as ‘promoting rape culture to an impressionable generation’; an impressive yet ultimately, misleading description of a pop song.

Robin Thicke has sparked fury for asserting the existence of ‘blurred lines’ concerning sexual consent. Given that the perpetrators of rape have often defended themselves by shifting blame onto their victims who “asked for it” (Thicke: “I know you want it”), the conclusion has been drawn that this song blatantly trivializes sexual consent and is therefore the fountainhead of rape culture.

However, if there is one line that cannot be blurred, it is this: correlation does not imply causation. A song does not cause rape, people do.

Angela joins in the card game…

By causally linking a song with rape culture, critics unwittingly provide the perpetrators of rape with the perfect scapegoat to their crimes. Whilst the power of the media is undeniable and there is no doubt that songs wield great power, neither are deterministic in controlling human behaviour.

The causes of rape and rape culture have been rigorously contested by the likes of social scientists and biologists, some argue that rape results from the socially constructed domination of men, whilst others point to crude biological factors within our evolutionary heritage. However, the common denominator remains uncontested: man is at the frontline of his misdeeds.

The only time that justice flounders and impunity triumphs is when perpetrators start to nitpick over every single morally bankrupt thing they have seen, experienced or heard, in this case a pop song, to justifying their crimes.

The hyper-sexualisation of women by the entertainment industry is by no means unprecedented. It wasn’t new when we sang along with Rihanna that chains and whips excite us, nor was it new when Fifty Cent beseeched us to enter into the candy shop and lick his lollipop.  In the same way, we all jumped on the Blurred Lines bandwagon to render it number one on the charts.

This phenomenon, the active backing of controversial songs, occurs because of a number of factors; including the human ear’s liking of catchy melodies or in this particular instance, fascination with things that are rebellious or taboo. However, what is less certain is whether our convictions can be said to be align with the lyrics of these songs. Thicke himself is happily married, as is TI.

If Blurred Lines represents no watershed in terms of sexism in music, why have universities chosen to oppose this song specifically? I don’t think intelligent students are about to have their own moral values swayed by a catchy pop song

If anything, the censorship of a song discredits students’ capacity to reason and choose righteousness as opposed to not being able to choose it at all. How are we to create the great minds of the future if we’re too scared to let them listen to a pop song?

I will choose to play blurred lines; at the end of the day, it’s a pop song, not a life choice.