Elle Bogle
There are many heated opinions about Sam Smith’s new music video for their latest release ‘I’m Not Here To Make Friends’. One article, in particular, has caught my eye and had me shaking with anger ever since.
The Offending Article
Gareth Roberts, an opinion writer for The Spectator, wrote ‘Sam Smith and the embarrassing terribleness of LGBTQIA+ culture’ in response to Smith’s latest music video.
The article title alone is controversial enough to provoke a response, let alone the use of vulgar language and exclusionary comments scattered throughout the article. This sparked my desire to respond to Roberts’ piece, despite the writer’s ultimate goal of a reaction to his controversial work(s).
In a similar reactionary tone to Katie Hopkins and Jeremy Clarkson, many conservative writers have been trying to generate views and perhaps traction with controversial articles. It seems that many writers are taking the sentiment “all press is good press” to the career grave.
Many queer people and allies have taken the high road by calmly defending Smith and similar controversies in the past. But why do we always have to be the ones to do this? For once, I am going to express my anger freely.
The Video In Question
The music video shows Smith singing, dancing, and strutting in gloriously camp, burlesque-inspired, queer clothing.
Their outfits in the video reference iconic queer figures, such as Madonna’s Jean Paul Gaultier corsets, Billy Porter’s pink cape and tuxedo gown, Dr. Frank-N-Furter from The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and potentially even Cruella DeVille with the dramatic car exit at the video’s ending.
Around them, dancers perform in mock period costumes, mildly-BDSM leather pieces, and bejewelled corsets. For more information on the outfits worn, see Smith’s recent Instagram posts.
As writer Daisy Jones titled her British Vogue article, “if Sam Smith were a thin, cis woman, no one would have given their new music video a second thought.” I can’t help but agree – cisgender women, including Madonna, Lady Gaga, and Liza Minelli, often use and create queer iconography in their art.
Sometimes, this helps artists like Smith find solidarity and pride in their queerness. Other times, it seems artists use queerness as a tool to widen their audience and cause a stir.
As for the sexual connotations of the video, it is undeniable that there is a systemic problem where women – especially those who fall within society’s confines of “conventionally attractive” – often feel forced to produce sexual content in their art. But as soon as they do, as Gareth Roberts tweeted, there is backlash.
So yes, slim, cisgender women would generate controversy if they created a similar video. But when a queer person with a larger or less conventionally ‘attractive’ body does it, it is deemed “hyper-sexualised”, and even “monstrous”.
Roberts shared his own views on Smith and their body, writing that he sees them as a “hefty, hairy thirty-year-old bloke who’s built like the Pillsbury Doughboy.” It is incomprehensible that a grown man believes he has the right to describe anyone that way – and Roberts’ purposeful misgendering of Smith is both infuriating and mind-bogglingly laughable to me.
More Than Misunderstanding
It’s clear that Roberts doesn’t understand the concept of people existing outside of the gender binary of ‘male’ and ‘female’. Despite acknowledging in the article that Smith is non-binary, he exclusively refers to them by he/him pronouns. Roberts even incorrectly states, that Smith “very much is [a man]”.
Misgendering can be a mistake that can be easily rectified and learnt from – if done with humility and understanding. But to purposefully ignore what is a vital aspect of someone’s identity, can have immeasurable damage. Misgendering and other forms of discrimination are one of the leading causes of suicide among gender-queer people.
Although the concept of people existing outside of the gender binary is not new, the conversation is becoming louder in the mainstream. Thus conjuring the false belief that the fluidity of gender is only a recent development.
I understand it may be a shock to see an open discussion about gender fluidity. It might be difficult to understand a concept that fundamentally pulls apart the binary system which has been entrenched into many societies for centuries.
But to actively refuse to understand – to dismiss and belittle those who are challenging the system – is ridiculous. Roberts and his peers look like whiny schoolchildren kicking and playing around in a little sandbox deteriorating with age – and they keep painting over the rust with exclusionary and wantonly ignorant rhetoric.
Other Bizarre Opinions
From their own words – as well as the smile and pure joy that radiates from them – Smith is, for the first time, enjoying their relationship with themself and their body. Yet, there are numerous negative discourses about the music video which come at odds with Smith’s positivity.
Internet personality, Oli London, called the video “degrading” and “not empowering” for him. Fine. The empowerment does not have to be for you, Oli London.
Alex Phillips linked the video to “sexual assault”, an explicit and inappropriate Police Force group chat, and “relationships falling apart”. There’s also an even more bizarre discussion on Twitter, with LadBible’s Gregory Robinson finding that one user oddly comparing “the sexually liberating music video to self-confessed misogynist Andrew Tate.”
It seems people find sadistic delight in not only verbally abusing someone they have never met but also hoping it is going to invoke reactions from others.
Julia Hartley-Brewer spent a significant portion of an interview with radio DJ Shivani Dave sharing her opinions of the grammatical problem of they/them pronouns, and whether Smith has “stuff in his pouch.”
If Hartley-Brewer took less than five minutes to research her own interviewees, she would’ve known that the level-headed Dave is also non-binary. I applaud Dave for being able to sit through that so calmly.
Roberts’ article is just another addition to his ongoing attacks on queer expression and excellence – his first online Spectator article was titled “The Sinister Side Of Pride”. In his most recent article, Roberts puts a cherry on the top of his dung heap cake by equating Smith’s queer expression to “a modern black singer performing a minstrel cake-walk with sincerity.” Ironically, it’s in the same article, where Roberts calls Smith “tone deaf”.
I Challenge Them To Be Understanding
Clearly, any individual with such an aggressive distaste for the LGBTQ+ community does not want to understand queerness. Everyone should be able to believe, write, and say what they want – honouring the right to free speech. But personally, I think that taking that stance in this instance is cowardly, lazy and just plain rude.
There is a fundamental difference between understanding someone and being understanding. The difference is simply kindness. One of the ways to be understanding towards someone is to comprehend them and the problems they face. But if you really don’t want to do that, you can just be nice. It’s really not that hard.
Featured image courtesy of Jason Leung via Unsplash. License can be found here. No changes were made to this image.
