Quote:
Originally posted by strandinthewind
I respectfully disagree.
Stevie hauled out in very carefully planned and very low cut outfits made of very sexy black chiffon (an odd if not shocking sight) that revealed her surgically enhanced breasts and was coked up out of her head until 1985 but gave spectacular performaces which set a standard she is still judged by today as much as 30 years later. Granted, she is not coked up anymore, but she is still trying (successfully in my opinion) to be sexy by exposing a leg every now and then and also hauling her boobs higher to heaven during Rhiannon. I am pretty sure she is doing this for sex appeal on her own terms because she has been doing this all along. I say more more power to her, but at the same time I think it is a little hypocritical to criticize someone else for doing basically the same thing and a thing that was not really done at all in her day.
Thus, my point, it is all about degrees of severity.
|
strandinthe wind,
i disagree with you on stevie using sex to sell the way britney does. first of all stevie back in the day, was as she is today a woman, a beautiful woman, i think a woman who wears a dress that reveals some cleavage, is not being overly sexual at all. stevie never looked cheap or sleazy , at least not in my opinion. britney came out in short shorts and a snake on her shoulders to sing and perform , why? stevies stage presence was never to shock the audience, you say she showed leg? oh, ahh not in the manner that these girls are, they go on stage in there underwear, stevie may do a high kick with a mile of lace covering her and you get to see her leg for a second, not the same thing, . i think maybe you are confusing stevies sex symbol status that she had when she was younger, but she got that because she was beautiful and talented, not because she was provocative on stage or degrading. the way britney and christina perform is very degrading to woman, but they will not be remembered for there songs , but for how they dressed on stage,,