Jillian Michael comments about Lizzo

Theoldguy1 wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

Theoldguy1 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Theoldguy1 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Theoldguy1 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

jseams1234 wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

jm_1234 wrote: »

Regarding Lizzo... Lizzo rubs her body in people's faces in a way that seems like a PR stunt. As an example just google Lizzo Lakers and warning what she did at the Lakers game is NSFW. Lizzo does the same thing other celebs do but she is appealing to a different demographic so she is using a different tool.

I interpret JM as saying Lizzo should not be defined by and should not get value by her body but more so by her singing. While it doesn't objectify via reduction to Lizzo's body, it is wrong also.

IMO the saddest thing about this and most movements is companies & celebs are telling people what emotions are ok to feel - and now we should only feel positive emotions about our bodies. It should be ok to feel all emotions about our bodies because we are human, our self worth and value is not based on external changeable factors but on the sole fact we are human.

Unless she made physical contact with people's faces, she is not rubbing her body in people's faces. She's just going out in the world in the body she lives in, and how other people react to that is their choice. (I don't click on NSW videos, so I don't know what she did, but since it's "the same thing other celebs do" I have to assume it's not illegal, like indecent exposure.)

It's not a literal term and you know that. She wore a dress that had a giant circle cut out of the rear that showed her complete *kitten* which was only covered by a thong. She then, in a public place, with tens of thousands of people present - many of them young children, twerked that uncovered *kitten* for everybody to see.

Nice "whataboutisms" further down - but I don't think Madonna, Howard Stern, or any other celebrity that I can think of has done something like this at a sports game in recent memory... maybe on stage or in Howard's case to promote a stupid movie.

So the parents of these young children are okay with the uniforms of the Laker Girls, which expose nearly as much, but seeing Lizzo's body is the bridge too far? We see as much of other celebrities all the time. Opposing it as a general trend, I get, but claiming that Lizzo is somehow worse is ridiculous. She's not the first celebrity to appear in the thong, she's not the first celebrity to twerk, she's not the first celebrity to reveal to kids that adults have butts.

Has Madonna done something like this in *recent* memory? Not that I'm aware of. But come on, you're acting like bringing up *Madonna* isn't relevant in a discussion about how Lizzo isn't the first female singer to display her body? That's not "whataboutism," it's acknowledging the reality that Lizzo is part of a hearty and longstanding tradition of female singers, she's just one of the biggest people to engage in it.

The way I understand it she was an audience member showing her *kitten* at a game not a performer. The last time I saw a sporting event none of the cheerleaders or scheduled entertainers were wearing visible thongs.

NBD, she is most likely somewhere around 14:30 on her 15:00 minutes if she feels she needs to do that to get attention.

So the argument is that it is appropriate to show parts of your body if you're performing, but if you're merely part of the audience it isn't? I am not convinced of this. What's the relevant difference?

If she had been performing at halftime in that uniform, it would somehow be more acceptable?

The spectators generally know what the cheerleader look like at a sporting event and the leagues have certain standards they must abide by. They also have rules for costumes used by any of the entertainment at the game. If a spectator doesn't want to see the league approved dress (cheerleaders or entertainment), they have the right not to go to the event.

If the NBA says a thong is fine dress for an entertainer, go for it with my blessings. If a publicity hound chooses to drop his or her drawers at a sporting event not really a fan of that.

She didn't "drop her drawers." She was wearing a revealing dress, one that is legal. You've seen just as much of other pop stars. We don't have a right to control what others wear just because we're buying a ticket to an NBA game.

Do you think that if you as a spectator at a game wore the same outfit, revealed yourself and acted in the same way you wouldn't at the very least be told to quit or possibly, more likely get kicked out and/or get a disorderly conduct violation?

It was a cheap publicity stunt that people paying good money to attend the game shouldn't be subjected to IMO. If the team authorized it another story.

My thoughts don't change regardless of her appearance.

The "team" (in the sense of the business) let her in dressed that way and apparently chose to play one of her songs knowing she was sitting court-side, and then apparently chose to display her thong-exposed rear while she was dancing to her song on the jumbotron, so, yeah, I don't think there's any "if" to whether the team authorized it.

You have obviously researched this more than I have (afraid what ads, suggestions, etc I would get if I Googled Lizzo twerking). It sounds like a publicity set up. Let them go for it. Fans that don't like that type of thing at a game can vote with their wallets and stay home.

That said, my earlier comment still stands - "she is most likely somewhere around 14:30 on her 15:00 minutes if she feels she needs to do that to get attention".