Feminist crusaders? No, these celebs are floozies in fishnets! CAROL SARLER is appalled by the stars dressed like cheap hookers at the Chime for Change concert

  • Beyonce squeezed provocatively into a black leather leotard
  • Jennifer Lopez wore the stuff of a fetishist's wildest dreams
  • Concert was billed as 'a feminist Live Aid'
  • But a dominatrix isn't a woman with power

By Carol Sarler

PUBLISHED: 15:53 EST, 5 June 2013 | UPDATED: 01:36 EST, 6 June 2013

Credit where credit is due: they might have meant well. When singers Beyonce Knowles, Jennifer Lopez and Mary J Blige - among others - agreed to perform at Saturday’s Chime for Change concert in London, perhaps they even believed it would be, as promised, 'a feminist Live Aid'.

After all, it was promoted as a good cause: to raise awareness of the need for education, health and justice for women everywhere.

In the end, however, what we got was feminism, girl power and emancipation - all preached by women dressed as cheap hookers in a dominatrix theme park.

Fetish feminists: Beyonce squeezed into a black leather leotard, left, while Jennifer Lopez wore fish nets and thigh-high boots
Fetish feminists: Beyonce squeezed into a black leather leotard, left, while Jennifer Lopez wore fish nets and thigh-high boots

Fetish feminists: Beyonce squeezed into a black leather leotard, left, while Jennifer Lopez wore fish nets and thigh-high boots

Beyonce headed the bill and set the tone, squeezed provocatively into a black leather leotard, nude fishnets and very little else.

Not to be outdone, Jennifer Lopez followed the fishnet-and-leather dress code, her black seamed tights teamed with thigh-high studded boots - the stuff of a fetishist’s wildest dreams.

 

More...

A lithe 22-year-old Australian hip hop artiste, Iggy Azalea, wore a frock that barely skimmed her knickers, while her thigh-high boots were laced to look as if they could be unlaced in a heartbeat if the price was right.

Meanwhile, Mary J Blige wore a flesh-coloured catsuit decorated with an applique design that made it look as if she was being groped by many shiny hands.

Revealing: Hip hop artiste, Iggy Azalea, wore a frock that barely skimmed her knickers
Revealing: Hip hop artiste, Iggy Azalea, wore a frock that barely skimmed her knickers

Revealing: Hip hop artiste, Iggy Azalea, wore a frock that barely skimmed her knickers

Each one looked as if she’d be more comfortable manacled to a bedpost - yet they bellowed 'feminist' slogans while the screens behind them displayed images of women such as the civil rights activist Rosa Parks.

Talk about mixed messages. Where shall we start?

The issue here is not about betraying what these mindless dollies think they mean by 'feminist'. As it happens, I have never called myself a feminist - but I like to think I know right from wrong and I have a deep distaste for unfairness.

I believe it is absolutely right to campaign against inequality in all its ugly guises, including, as our floozies on Saturday were meant to highlight, the plight of poor women worldwide.

As long as women drop like flies from Aids in Africa, as long as 800 women every day die in childbirth, as long as women perform 66 per cent of the world’s work to reap only 11 per cent of the world’s income, then please, let’s speak up.

But when wealthy Western women strip themselves of most of their clothing and all their dignity in the name of struggling women in developing countries, you come close to finding the good outweighed by the bad.

Appropriate attire? Mary J Blige wore a flesh-coloured catsuit decorated with an applique design that made it look as if she was being groped by many shiny hands

Appropriate attire? Mary J Blige wore a flesh-coloured catsuit decorated with an applique design that made it look as if she was being groped by many shiny hands

One thing that strikes home whenever we see heartbreaking footage of famine is how even the worst-affected women hold tight to their dignity, often to the very end.

You see them slumped in futile embrace, trying to suckle a dying child from empty breasts (yes, J-Lo, breasts. Suckle. It’s what they’re for). You see them bury the child carefully, quietly, knowing they will be next for the grave. What might those women think if they should ever have the misfortune to see Knowles, Lopez or Blige writhing semi-nakedly in public ‘on their behalf’?


I wonder how much many of the Chime for Change performers knew or cared about the poor women in whose names they were performing

Would they think ‘Gosh, how I’d love to be a Western woman?’

Or would they think (more likely, I venture) that the whole world has gone flaming mad?

In answer to critics like myself - and Twitter was chock-a-block with women decrying Saturday’s display - the cavorting songbirds would say that they only present themselves this way because that is what their fans expect - and by pleasing fans they sell tickets which, in turn, makes money for charitable causes around the world.

Except that this argument was thoroughly undermined on the night of Chime for Change, by none other than music’s Queen Bee herself: Madonna.

Now, as we all know, Madonna is no stranger to the outrageous, the outlandish and the reveal-all when dressing up for her fans on a concert stage. Even to the point where some suggest that ‘at her age’, 54, it might be time to, er, tone it down a bit.

On Saturday she knew there was more at stake than just pleasing the regular fan club. She had the intelligence to understand the underlying issues and the discernment to dress appropriately.

To the point: Surprisingly, it was Madonna who dressed demurely in black trousers and a turtle neck jumper as she gave a speech on the importance of education for girls

To the point: Surprisingly, it was Madonna who dressed demurely in black trousers and a turtle neck jumper as she gave a speech on the importance of education for girls

She appeared in a black turtle-neck sweater, plain wool trousers, hair kept simple. Thus attired, she delivered an impassioned ten-minute speech on the importance of education for girls.

It was an echo of her appearance on Live Aid in 1985, where even then she understood the point of it and dressed in a trouser suit, adorned with a small crucifix.

So: if one star can unexpectedly show decency and taste, why can’t others do likewise? The answer, I fear, boils down to why they are doing the show in the first place. Is it about doing good for others, or doing good for me, me, me?

For many years I produced charity galas for overseas aid - sick children, in my case - and I learnt very quickly who was in it for the right reasons and who saw it as little more than career advancement; a chance, perhaps, to promote a new record or catch the eye of Hollywood.

Some would have their 'people' hassle me for top billing ('Alphabetical', I always said. 'Get over it.') or the 'best' dressing room. Some acts never did catch on why they were there. Backstage at a different benefit I heard one big name ask another, ‘Which bit of Africa is Nicaragua in, anyway?’


First ladies

Hillary Clinton and Lady Gaga topped a recent poll to find the top ten modern feminists

Others, happily, were brilliant. Richard Whiteley and the comedian Bill Bailey both spent ages in a - communal! - dressing room, asking me about sick children and their needs. While some demanded limousines, Harry Hill and Graham Norton both arrived on foot.

My friend Bea Arthur, of The Golden Girls, paid her own way from Los Angeles to London and proceeded to bring the house down. Her one nod to diva-ism was to say she couldn’t do her own make-up, so could her fellow star Jo Brand do it instead? Jo, one of the best, did.

Mixed messages: The concert called for women to be respected and well-educated but many of the stars presented themselves as sex objects

Mixed messages: The concert called for women to be respected and well-educated but many of the stars presented themselves as sex objects

So, while many earned my trust, others taught me to be cynical. Cynical enough to wonder how much many of the Chime for Change performers knew or cared about the poor women in whose names they were performing. No, they were more likely concerned at being seen on TV in 150 countries, by up to a billion people, which is no end of a plug for whatever they are selling this week.

I can’t think of any other reason for what was, in the end, simple disrespect. Their business, I suppose; their choice.

But next time they wish to tart up like Miss Whiplash in the name of 'feminism', someone should tell them: a dominatrix isn’t a woman with power. Quite the reverse. She only gets to crack a whip as long as a man pays her to do so.

Your idea of progress? Mine neither.

Comments (186)

The comments below have not been moderated.

 View all

the description of mary j's outfit is so ridiculous it's laughable. she is covered YET someone still isn't satisfied about the design on it. to me it looks like purple ivy & not "groping hands"..... but why stop there. she should go after ballerina's, gymnasts, swimmers, sprinters, etc. there is a reason why certain performers wear the type of attire they wear. if you are going to be moving around allot you wear certain things. if don't know the industry you shouldn't comment about it saying extremely negative or offensive things... & they are ALL wearing dance tights.

Click to rate     Rating   16

Report abuse

Instead of women showing "power" dressing as sl*ts, how about fighting for equal pay? That was my issue with the 70's feminist movement - women wanted to fuss about what we were called - fireman, firefigher, pstman, postal carrier, ad nauseum - and NOT about key issues like MONEY. It's about the MONEY ladies, not whether you have the right to wear leather knickers. Until we all realize that, this is what we will be.(Women still make less than their male counterparts - and will as long as women like these make millions showing their bits and pieces.

Click to rate     Rating   15

Report abuse

Oh they are showing you their power all right. They dress as provocatively as they do because they can afford to hire a number of private security guards to protect them. It's all about "can't touch this." As for keeping cool in tight leather outfits--hilarious, girl!

Click to rate     Rating   12

Report abuse

Interesting that Madonna had the sense to cover up a bit. While I do not think there is any need for anyone to dress like a stripper, that's their personal choice, is it not? That said, I have always found it highly ironic that Beyonce once sang: ''Nasty put some clothes on, I told ya. Don't walk out your house without your clothes on, I told ya. Girl what you thinkin' bout lookin' that to' down, I told ya. These men don't want no hot female that's been around the block female, you nasty girl.'' when she wears next to nothing herself. Hypocrite, much?

Click to rate     Rating   25

Report abuse

you're just whingy because all these women are a lot hotter than you.

Click to rate     Rating   36

Report abuse

I was at the concert, the writer forgets to mention the fact that for most of beyonce's performance she was wearing a ballgown. And perhaps Madonna was dressed as she was because she wasn't performing but was only giving a speech. Get your facts right.

Click to rate     Rating   3

Report abuse

Carol Saler, have you ever heard of the Monarch mind control programme and the Illuminati?

Click to rate     Rating   17

Report abuse

WHO ARE THESE PEOPPLE?

Click to rate     Rating   5

Report abuse

It always amazes me how a woman's right to choose always involves wearing things that men like...

Click to rate     Rating   69

Report abuse

feminist crusader. what a completely laughable term. most of these so called crusaders basically want all men to be servile, while they chastise the normal everyday women who occasionally like to be a bit daring with her outfit or action. they are a bunch hypocrits with no intellegent thoughts between them. ladys, you wear what you want when you want.

Click to rate     Rating   30

Report abuse

Share this comment

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.