So sure, this may be a week late, but I needed the time to compose my thoughts about Adam Lambert and his highly erotic, same-sex, gender bending, wild performance at the AMAs.
Granted, it was provocative. It could have even been considered sexually aggressive. But really, let's cut the hypocrisy. We've always extended sexual and creative freedom to women as long as they were attractive and were scantily dressed. (Think Madonna, Britney, Christina...) So what is it about Adam Lambert that infuriates and scares people? Is it all about the same-gender kissing and simulated oral sex? Is it that he's a man who loves glitter and eyeliner? Or is it that he (in all of his glam glory) is both masculine and feminine enough to be considered sexually attractive to many of us, regardless of how we identify -- and that's what really makes us uncomfortable?
Now I do realize that some people are upset about "the children." "The children" whose parents let them stay up until 11:00 pm on a school night. Probably the same "children" who are allowed to watch all sorts of sex saturated teen dramas during prime time. And probably the same "children" who have seen Adam Lambert's (hot) CD cover and know that he has made no secret about who he is.
I am a parent and once I was a nine-year-old girl who stayed up late watching Madonna simulate woman-on-top sex in a wedding gown. Did it scar me forever? No. Did I ask my parents about it -- not that I remember. It really wasn't such a big deal. Did I ask my mom what a virgin was? Yes. She answered, "someone who hasn't had sex." Simple question. Simple answer.
I am far more concerned with the fact that at 9:00 pm I can turn on Law and Order and CSI (both of which I admittedly love) and see a decomposing body or a person who has been bludgeoned beyond recognition. That makes me mad...for "the children."
But back to Adam Lambert. His simulated oral sex didn't bother me. His same sex kiss with his drummer didn't bother me, either. Good for him for pushing the envelope. Good for him for enabling an entire country to start a dialogue about our own personal boundaries, gender expression, and sexual orientation. Madonna created an entire career out of it.
Why is it acceptable for women to behave outwardly sexual, to be objectified, or to objectify someone else? Instead of screaming about the evils inherent in Adam Lambert's performance, perhaps we should use this as an opportunity to talk about that old ugly double standard which still exists, but has turned slightly on its head with respect to sexual orientation. Believe it or not, our children -- of any and all ages -- know about the double standard. Our little girls know what it feels like when they are forced to play the role of the nurse or the teacher or the wife. Our little boys know what it feels like when they want to wear pink or play with dolls or draw pictures of rainbows and some adult looks at them and says, "Those things aren't for little boys -- go change or play with something else."
I have heard it. I have spoken out against it. And this is no different. If you are outraged about Adam Lambert's performance because you don't like sex on television in general, fine. But if you like it for half-naked girls who will make out with other half-naked girls, well, you're a hypocrite.
So Adam, thank you for bringing our dirty little secret out into the open.