Certain passages in Morrissey's book, Autobiography, read as misogynistic polemics against femaleness. To deny this is delusional. Here is an example: "Night after night like an unowned dog I would tear through the park, a creature in human form, all perilous bolt inviting danger, the bike dancing controlled flips as I gulped jets of rain–more danger, more fun. In comparison, what had girls to offer? Nothing but a mangled jungle of tangled hair presented as the jackpot payoff. Honeypots sprawled like open graves, their owners doing nothing at all other than letting you. The call of duty is all yours–to turn on and get off; to hit the spot and know the ropes; to please and be pleased; as the owners of such Bermuda Triangles do... nothing."
Coming from anyone else, this would read as hate speech. Why do we forgive the writer who pens such a diatribe against our sex? Because he is Morrissey? Yes, because he is Morrissey. But should we? Or should we hold him accountable?
I never cared—still don't—about his sexual orientation. I mean, I never had romantic fantasies to be with the man. Sure he is sexy, charismatic, and handsome. I guess when I first set eyes on him and for a short time after that, there was an attraction. But I am a realist. Wasn't gonna hook-up with him. I had no illusions of such. So it mattered not that he wasn't sexually attracted to women. But not being attracted to them is one thing. Being utterly disgusted by them is another. I assumed, rightfully, that he is gay. This noted passage, along with several others in the book, confirm this for me.
Imagine if he, as a white person, wrote a diatribe against blackness. Alarm bells would go off. But as most of us know, sex/gender is the last form of discrimination that is tolerated—worldwide. You think it isn't? You think we have moved past sex/gender discrimination? No one thinks it is acceptable anymore? Think again. How many of the liberals out there cry out against gender segregation in Islamic societies? Not too many. There is outrage about Palestinians being oppressed by the Israelis. But nobody is talking about liberating the women from male oppression, within this sex segregated society.
What Moz wrote was at the very least, insensitive. I am really glad I am not one to hang on his every word. For if I were, I would be devastated.
Anybody remember when Christopher Hitchens wrote that article claiming women weren't funny? It was a great polemic. I didn't agree with him. Not sure more than a handful of folks did/do. But the Internet lit up light a Christmas tree. And every liberal and conservative newspaper, talk show, and online magazine was discussing it, asking, "Is he sexist?" "Is he a misogynist?" There was careful, intelligent debate. The best of the best voiced their opinions, and wrote articulate retorts.
There isn't much going on debate-wise when it comes to Morrissey's attacks on femaleness. Why? Why the eerie silence in the media? Why the silence here? Actually, the silence on Solo is not surprising. Because, to bring up such a topic results in an idiotic comment such as, "What is the point of this thread?" This type of fan wants to silence the dissenters, the free thinkers, the folks who question things. Bringing these things out in the open threatens to pop their filter bubbles.
What does it mean if Morrissey hates femaleness—at least sexually? Does it change the way we interpret the songs? Is he no longer on our side—a voice for equality? What do lyrics such as pretty girls make graves and I lost my faith In womanhood look like in this new light? Should we now take them more literally? Reevaluate all the songs? Would doing so ruin the listening experience for many? Yes, I am certain it would. Would it ruin mine? No, not at all. Never saw him as a hero or as a champion for the female sex—and her interests. So, nobody has fallen off a pedestal in my world. I do, however, feel sad for those who did hold Moz to a higher standard, believing him to be a spokesperson for women's rights and issues. This book, surely, was a soul crusher.