so, what do you suggest "nearly 100% of women" do?

TBH, comparing Lady Gaga with Madonna or early Britney Spears, it seems to me that Gaga is doing a self-aware dada parody of the pop diva archetype.

(And I mention dada because the meat dress, the cigarette glasses and some of the most bizarre outfits aren't that far from Luis Buñuel or Salvador Dali territory. Dali would have *loved* Gaga.)

Yes, nearly 100% of women do it to some degree, so why an article detailing the specific ways in which Lady Gaga does it? Each person's patriarchal bargain is slightly different, but is there something wildly different about hers? I would say no. Not really worth the article.

I was really hoping for a more in depth and nuanced analysis. Lady Gaga subverts the patriarchy while also bowing to it. She fascinates the hell out of me, but this article was pretty much a face value critique and has a hint of "blame the victim."

Women like to be objectified. Women love when people notice how hot they look. There is also such a thing as a female gaze, you know. It's why civilization exists - because men need to be attractive through acquiring status and power by being influential and talented, the innovation civilization is built on and propelled by being the product. But we don't complain. If a woman isn't attracted to a guy because he's in long-term underemployment or can't afford a car, we don't try to tear down women's standards of attraction. 

When she started out, I thought of her message as something like "Okay, they're going to sexualize me no matter what, so I'm going to do it on my terms.  They want sex?  They can have it, but it's going to be disturbing and over-the-top, period."

I am so fucking tired of women getting blamed for living in the patriarchy.  You know who faces the backlash from the "patriarchal bargain"? Everyone who isn't a man. This is just a feminist-sugarcoated version of victim blaming that puts more responsibility on the oppressed than on the systems oppressing them. FUCK THIS.

What about her drag persona Jo Calderone? How does that appeal to the male gaze and conform to typical gender roles? There is no mass market appeal for drag kings.

Good article. A lot of people seem to take issue with this being pointed out, but as I see it, an important part of moving forward is to never take progress of granted and remember that "better" does not mean "best". You'll only end up giving ammunition to the "human rights too far" crowd, trust me on this one.

I might agree with this, except it's reaaally hard to bolster this argument when you use a frame from "Bad Romance" wherein she is playing a sex slave about to murder her captor. But all semi-nude women's bodies are propping up patriarchy, right?

I'm not a big fan of Lady Gaga. I find her uncreative and boring all the moreso because she is trying to present herself has hyper-creative and weird.

But, for sake of argument, let's give her the benefit of the doubt. Let's say that her project includes, as one aspect, embracing her own sexuality and body, enjoying her sexuality and body, and expressing her sexuality and body in a way that is genuinely liberating for herself and others. If she could successfully pull this off in a genuinely liberating way, what would it look like? Is there any way that it could be done that wouldn't end up being incorporated against her will into the patriarchal bargain? If not, does it mean conceding this territory to patriarchy (i.e. you might be able to be liberated and own your own sexuality in private, but never on stage)?

I find the patriarchal bargain to be an excellent and helpful concept (the Tila Tequila post in particlar sticks out in my mind) although I acknowledge that it runs the risk of blaming the victim. One way of re-framing it that is more sympathetic to Lady Gaga and other women is that they are inventing their own way of existing in their own skin, and it is up to men to change the way they relate to her performances.

Or here is another way to frame my question. I would find it useful to start identifying women who in some way effectively reject/resist/subvert the patriarchal bargain. Specifically, is there a good example of a woman who has embraced/expressed her sexuality in some public way (through art/media, etc) who has not fallen back into the patriarchal bargain?

Is the modern fashion industry still controlled by The Patriarchy™? Because Gaga is all about the intersection between music and fashion. Why does nobody complain about David Bowie exploiting his sex when he wore skimpy Ziggy Stardust outfits, and pretended to be gay to shock and awe?

Gaga can do whatever the hell she wants with her own sexuality, for her own gain, and it does not put her in the employ of the male gaze. If she chooses to exploit our weakness for watching displays of female sexuality, that's our shame — not hers.

no woman has the duty to try to break down patriarchy single-handedly. that's not how it gets better.

My major problem with Lady Gaga is that she has all of these messages about self acceptance but when it comes down to her videos and stage shows she only presents thin bodies, its almost like her messages only apply to thin people. I think she would be wise to hire dancers with a wider diversity of body shapes and sizes.

Serious question: What is the moral difference between a woman who gains an advantage by working with a patriarchal system and a man who does the same, and a person of each other gender?

I though the purpose of the site was to observe the conditions that actually exist. Not to be a locus of progressive change, even though a large proportion of readers and writers are progressive.

So it would appear I owe the community of Sociological Images an apology for my "thread policing" arguments.

I'm sorry for assuming that since this was a teaching blog, that the
members would be willing to teach instead of denounce all opinions aside
from their own.

I'm sorry for thinking that someone should have the right to their
argument without automatically being assumed to be a misogynist.

I'm sorry for assuming that conversations should take place instead of attacks.

I'm sorry for assuming that the people of this community should use
rhetoric instead of drowning out the other party in hurtful and assuming
comments.

I'm sorry for hoping this community was full of adults instead of schoolyard children.

I'm sorry for assuming the people of this thread had manners.

I'm sorry for assuming that this community is anyone but catty bitches.

I'm sorry for assuming that this community would understand how easily thoughtless comments can hurt.

I'm sorry for visiting this site everyday in the interests in expanding my sociological knowledge.

I'm sorry for taking the time to post for the first time. You needn't worry, you've shown me you're not worth it. I'll never come back and post again.

I will just leave you with a quote: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it." - Beatrice Hall

Gaga's feminism and relationship to the patriarchy has been written about many times before, and much more eloquently than this reductionary piece (which is a watered down version of Nancy Bauer's piece from the NY Times: “Since Gaga herself literally embodies the norms that she claims to be putting pressure on (she’s pretty, she’s thin, she’s well-proportioned), the message, even when it comes through, is not exactly stable. It’s easy to construe Gaga as suggesting that frank self-objectification is a form of real power.”

However, both Bauer and this author (who seems to have plagiarized Bauer's main idea) are wrong when it comes to Gaga. There is too much to say about this topic that has already been written before; I recommend starting here: http://gagajournal.blogspot.com/2010/11/free-bitch-feminism-post-gender-of-lady.html

Also god forbid a woman ever choose to wear minimal clothing, sorry slut shaming article is slut shaming.

Another name for the patriarchal bargain is "gender contract". It's used in criminology and criminal justice to describe how women express what is perceived as feminine behaviour in order to receive better treatment by the mostly male prison staff. Anne Worrall has written much on this.

Seriously? Is it wrong for a woman to be feminine? I mean, sure, not everyone wants to be that, and I embrace that idea. But to criticize someone for wanting to be feminine? That's just as bad as people telling butchy girls to grow up and stop being lesbians. At least Lady Gaga is doing something positive, and she wouldn't be able to reach out and help that many people if she was really anti-establishment.

The premise here seems  that Lady Gaga is a feminist.  I couldn't but wonder though, at what point in time did Lady Gaga claim she is a feminist? She's an individualist seeking power, yes, but even her name does not adhere to feminism...

This is ridiculous.  gaga exhibits "sexiness that appeals to the male gaze" and that means she's engaging in a patriarchal bargain? what the fuck? Why do people always assume that a woman is only trying to look sexual for the enjoyment of men? Maybe Gaga LIKES to wear underwear and shake her ass! she isn't making a bargain with the patriarchy at all... It isn't like there's some sort of deal that says she gets this much weird costume time in exchange for this much semi-nudity. Gaga does what she wants! why can't she be unique and weird and crazy AND sexy/skimpy/ass shaking? Just because a video incorporates sexualized dancing doesn't mean it's trying to appeal to men. As a (straight!) woman, i find gaga's sexy dancing appealing!

I know that I will give sociologists everywhere massive coronaries by daring to ask the questions of: What is original about dancing around with few or no clothes on?  This activity has been going on for thousands of years and people today foolishly have convinced themselves that they have made some sort of new discovery.  The idea of a woman that will give away her virtue for money and attention is old and boringly unoriginal.  The only two choices that so-called modern art appear to be offering are erotomania or megalomania.  Lady Gaga like a host of others will receive her 15 minutes of fame and will fade into obscurity.

One of the hallmarks of patriarchy is the suppression of the open expression of femininity and sensuality by women. All the societies that have imposed puritanical dress codes have been patriarchal in nature. It's actually beyond sad that anyone identifying as a feminist would point towards femininity and sensuality in women's fashion as a result of patriarchal influence. Patriarchy quakes in fear of the power that women can have over men. Sexuality is healthy for both genders, but patriarchal males desire control over female sexuality. They want what they desire behind closed doors and feel their desires are all that is relevant. However, they almost always desire to control any expression of female sensuality outside of their possession.

Capitalism may utilize femininity and sensuality as just another tool to drive consumerism. However, capitalism is not itself patriarchy. It tends to be devoid of ideology or morality beyond the motive of profit.

Women fought hard to be free of patriarchal controls against the open expression of femininity and female sensuality. Patriarchy greatly desires to put that djinni back in the bottle and that they have been so successful in manipulating a portion of self described feminists into become tools of anti-feminine control is just mind blowing.