Sky Ferriera just released her debut album and yet all LA Weekly “music critic” Art Tavana can talk about are her breasts.
He starts off the story like this,
“Sky Tonia Ferreira, 23, has a name that reads like a turbo-charged Italian sports car, or the kindred spirit to second-generation Italian-American pop star, Madonna, the most ambitious woman to ever wear a pink cone bra. Both Sky and Madonna have similar breasts in both cup size and ability to cause a shitstorm.”
So instead of comparing Sky to Madonna because of her musical prowess, he decides to go with a cup size comparison. Great.
But it doesn’t stop there. He continues:
“When Ferreira dropped her debut, Night Time, My Time, three years ago, the bare-breasted album cover nearly broke the internet. Misogynists claimed it was a desperate attempt to sell records; feminists saw it as the calculated move of a defiant young woman. A third unnamed group that included me couldn’t help but reminisce on the past, on Madonna’s defiantly atomic boobs — the two knockers that altered the course of human history.”
Gross? Yes. Sexist? Hell yes.
Art Tavan has been receiving flack across the internet for his misogynistic comments. It got so bad that Art’s editor Andy Hermann was forced to write an apology article (which you can read in full here). He admitted that they had crossed a line and apologized profusely.
But he also defends the article. He says, “Tavana’s intention, the way I saw it, was to write about an artist he admires in a way that didn’t shy away from her use of her image and sexuality as a part of that artistry. I felt that, in doing this, he wasn’t trying to objectify or degrade her.”
But how does that make it ok?
The larger problem it seems isn’t that someone wrote this article, but rather that someone else read it, approved it, and allowed it to be posted public. How many editors does it take to realize sexism when they see it?
Unfortunately both the original article, as well as the apology article, dig up a much bigger issue: that adult professional men don’t seem to fully grasp the concept of objectification. This is both deeply disturbing as well perplexing. Where did we go wrong in society that a legitimate media source can’t determine the difference between provocative and misogynist? Honestly, it doesn’t seem like either the writer nor the editor has learned their lesson, nor are we convinced that this won’t happen again and again.