Gender and Sex: Blurred Lines or Clear Boundaries? One of the hottest songs of summer 2013 was a song by Robin Thicke called "Blurred Lines." The song gained popularity because of its catchy tune, and many people who found themselves dancing along to the song found themselves surprised by the lyrics when they actually listened to the song. In fact, the lyrics to the song were sufficiently suggestive that discussions about whether they were a symbol of rape culture became almost as popular as the song itself. The lyrics were not helped by the video for the song, which featured Thicke, two guest artists, and three scantily clad models in situations that could only be described as bizarre, leading to allegations that the video marginalized its female performers. Adding fuel to this fire was a performance by Thicke featuring Miley Cyrus, in which they seemingly referenced the video and Miley engaged in a hyper-sexual manner that seemed to make much of America uncomfortable. Interestingly enough, while the media and the public seemed to lambast Cyrus for her performance, there was little public condemnation of Thicke, who also participated in the performance, and is a married man, approaching middle age. Instead, the condemnation focused on Cyrus, a young, single woman. For many, including the author, the response was sexist; why was the young woman condemned for engaging in behavior when the older male was not? As a result, this essay will focus, not on the Cyrus/Thicke performance, but on the video for Blurred Lines, which was clearly the source inspiration for the later performance.

It would be reductive to call the video Blurred Lines sexist. The video does feature three fully-clad males cavorting with three younger, scantily clad or nude, beautiful young women. However, while the women are beautiful and scantily clad, they are not engaging in behavior that is particularly sexual. No one in the video has intercourse, though the video opens with Thicke and one model in bed together. However, most of the video has the women doing things that are just seemingly random, not overtly sexual. These random scenes featuring the women include: sitting on a bale of hay, playing with a sheep, walking around with a large die, riding a bicycle, making animal noises, dancing, moving their mouths, having a car move down the curve of her back, playing with what appears to be a taxidermied large dog, allowing the men to play with their hair, lighting a cigarette for Thicke, wearing a gas mask, swinging what appears to be a giant rope of sausage links, and rubbing feet on Thicke's face (RobinThickeVEVO). Do allegations that these behaviors are sexualized and marginalizing point out that the video is sexist or do they reinforce societal norms suggesting that anything an attractive woman does must be sexual, as some have suggested? The argument is then that critics of the video are the ones perpetuating sexual stereotypes.

However, pointing out that none of the behavior was overtly sexual ignores the sexualized connotations to much of the behavior. For example, all of the models are wearing bright red lipstick. While this could simply be a fashion choice, it is impossible to ignore the notion rosy and red colored lipsticks can trace their popularity to the fact that post-orgasm women tend to have flushed skin, so that cheeks and lips appear rosier. This has translated into lipstick and rouge being used to simulate the post-orgasmic flush, which is not even a conscious choice for most women who decide to wear lipstick. However, while the reasoning may be lost, red lipstick is still considered a bold choice because of its subconscious sexual connotations. Furthermore, the fact that lipstick is, traditionally, worn only by females bears some consideration. After all, males also flush as a sign of arousal; yet simulating this arousal has become a female phenomenon. As a result, the wearing of lipstick can be said to be gendered, in that cultural norms limit it to members of one gender. However, "Gender ought not to be conceived merely as the cultural inscription of meaning on a pregiven sex (a juridical conception); gender must also designate the very apparatus of production whereby the sexes themselves are established" (Butler, p.11). Are there underlying reasons why females might simulate arousal and males might not? The core biological differences between males and females and the fact that women can reproduce without...

However, when one considers that a frequently used slang term for vagina (which many people also view as pejorative) is also a term for cat, the choice of a meow does seem to be sexualized. Likewise the mouth movements on the model, particularly the blonde model featured in the video, are not overtly sexual, but cultural norms have decreed the mouth an erogenous zone. And have determined that making such gestures with the mouth may be, in some ways, mimicking oral sex. Taken together, it becomes clear that, while not engaging in sexual behavior, the models are certainly behaving in sexualized behavior.
While the behavior in the video was highly sexualized, it did not seem to invite the rape culture comparisons that surrounded much of the discussion of the song. There was nothing about the video that made it appear that the women were in any way being coerced to participated in any of the events in the video. On the contrary, any behavior that would be equated to flirtation seemed to have been initiated by the women, who seemed intent on attracting the attention of the three males featured in the video. Even one of the most blatantly disrespectful acts in the video, when Thicke exhales cigarette smoke in the face of one of the models, follows the model lighting the cigarette for him. It is true that the women are scantily clad and the men are not, but, when placed alongside images in videos for other pop songs, the women in the video do not appear to be significantly marginalized.

However, the fact that the models are sexualized and very scantily clad does not tell the entire story about the video. The lyrics of the song, which will be discussed below, while certainly sleazy may or may not be predatory, depending on the interpretation of the listener. However, the behavior in the video is not open to that same type of interpretation. The male characters in the video, which was directed by a woman, come across as goofy, harmless, and somewhat dazzled by the women in the video. They do not seem threatening, harmful, or predatory. In fact, at worst they seem like horny teenagers who may desperately want to bed one of the women, and who make juvenile jokes about the size of their penises; and at best they seem like horny teenagers who have managed to bed some of the women and who make juvenile jokes about penis size. In other words, they do not appear threatening.

Perhaps it is the fact that they do not appear threatening that transforms the song and its video into a piece of propaganda for rape culture. If the video featured a true-to-life rape scenario, for example, showing Thicke approaching a woman in a bar, buying her drinks until she was too intoxicated to consent, and then having sex with an unconscious woman who had traces of vomit on her face and in her hair, then he would clearly be depicted as the bad guy in that scenario. It would be an indefensible position. However, the video does not show those depictions. Instead, against a background of lyrics suggesting that Thicke can look at a woman and know she wants it, and with the rapper T.I. using lyrics suggesting that sex with him would be violent, the men are cavorting and interacting in a playful and, perhaps even submissive, manner with the women in the video. It can be very difficult to reconcile those images with the alarmist warnings that people have issued about the songs. Clearly, "Blurred Lines is not about rape in the same way that Cop Killer is about the fantasy of killing cops, so it is a question of interpretation. If you don't think the song's narrator is willing to have sex without consent, then the song seems at worst sleazy, and the reaction overblown. If, however, you think that the concept of "blurred lines" sends a dangerous message to listeners, then it's explosive" (Lynskey).

Therefore, whether the song is dangerous has to be examined, not simply from the video or the lyrics, but by considering them against the backdrop of the surrounding culture. The apparent dichotomy between the goofy video and the predatory lyrics can be better understood when one reflects on the idea that rape culture is not about overtly…