LADY GAGA, WHY SHE DID IT?

She performed practically naked during a show watched by millions of Americans and the world at large, including children. But no major hoopla was raised about her indecent exposure, or the fact that she was publicly displaying her female genitalia on national television, why? Janet Jackson, during a once Super Bowl half-time show, exposed one of her mammary gland with the nipple fully covered as required by law, yet they called for her head for in their words, 'shamelessly "defiling" children's sensibilities?' Janet was called all sorts of names and accused of all manner of things including exposing children to pornography; yet children suckle on their mother's breasts while weaning? Icheoku asks, between a breast and a vagina, which one is more 'adults-only' to warrant a superior caution and protection from children? Which of the two female body-parts if wrongly showed, would mostly and more offensively, constitute an indecent exposure?

Lady Gaga, appeared at the last American Grammy Award 2010 dressed in an outfit with a bikini-like bottom that could almost pass for a thong? It showed her fully shaved vaginal parameters walls, and barely covering her labials; which led one commentator to 'eulogise' the striptease display as 'exhibiting her "beautiful vagina?'' In a piece titled 'Lady Gaga gender rumors debunked once and for all', posted on February 2, 2010 in the Huffington-Post, the author, glorifying Lady Gaga's bare-bottom nakedness wrote, "Just in case there was any residual doubt that Lady Gaga was harboring a penis under her glittery stage-wear, photos from her amazing Grammy performance indicate she's all female. Last summer at a concert in the UK, an upskirt snap of Gaga showed what looked like a tiny penis. Gaga was the subject of widespread hermaphrodite rumors and embraced as a post-gender icon before she defended her "beautiful vagina."

Icheoku asks what is so beautiful about Lady Gaga's vagina to warrant such flagrant indecent exposure of it before millions of world-wide viewers including children, who have been wondering and sometimes asking their mothers, where babies come from? What is so beautiful about a drab-looking piece of flesh except the imagination of driving into its hot volcano? What is so sightly about a slab looking female genitalia that any writer could find comfort in defending its crass exhibition by anyone, including Lady or rather Stripper Gaga? If not that vagina serve as a conduit to bring babies into this world, what else is so beautiful about the vagina especially this one under advisement? Icheoku says, vagina is beautiful so long as it is hidden and difficult to see and reach; without effort being made to reach and unravel it, there is no beauty in it. Simply put, it is the road traveled to reach the destination that commands the respect and admiration of vagina; but not when it is flagrantly thrust upon everyone's face, in at-your-face-like manner, as Lady Gaga just did? Such exhibitionism makes vagina cheap, nasty, ugly and uninviting; and Lady or Stripper Gaga should have known better and covered up a little bit more.

Why write this piece since I am not an anti-female sexuality chauvinistic pig or have anything against eroticism or its exhibition? I write because the feminists of America called blue murder when Adam Lambert simulated eroticism during his appearance in last year's America's Music Award; and the same group of people are now maintaining a certain disquieting silence and ironically, praising Lady Gaga's exhibitionism, as trail-blazing and a testament to the beauty of the vagina? Double standards? What an arrant nonsense by a sexist feminists dominated society, gradually trying so hard to emasculate all their male counterparts and put away their masculinity in testicles-lock boxes; with due respect to the owner of that phrase, Rush Limbaugh!

Why should Icheoku mind, afterall Lady Gaga is an adult and can do with her body whatever she pleases? Yes, but not before a world-wide television audience with a lot of children watching? Moreso with the selectiveness of what is decent or not, depending on who don it or who was wearing what? If a black girl, wrong? If a male of whatever race, wrong? But for a white girl, there must be an explanation as she could be just showing off her "beautiful vagina" to debunk suspicion of being a travesty or hermaphrodite? Really? I don't get it, I won't get it, and I refuse to get it that it is ok to appear on a stage for a world-wide performance in "bikinis," which barely covered her vaginal lips? No, it is not alright, or proper or appropriate; Lady Gaga and her minders should have known better and acted otherwise, but instead they did not and surprisingly the media is carrying her waters that it is ok - the lady who can do no wrong was simply defending her "beautiful vagina?"

During our research for this article, we came upon a postulation that Lady Gaga came out partially naked on a world-wide stage just to prove that she has no phallus underneath; and that since it is being rumoured she is a man performing as a female, there was a need to publicly disprove that! Admitted that many people including this writer have wondered and theorised about the gender of the Madonna-on-steroids of this age; but that does not make it ok for such display as was put up with those offensive outfits. It is equally instructive that some people even likened her to the South Africa track-sensation, Caster Samanya and seriously questioned if Lady-G is a gender-fraud? We believe that such rumours got to her ear or that of her minders before they decided to put it away in a perpetual crypt; but how? She waited for the night of the Grammy's, when she knew that it will make much impact and off she went to the stage, clad in 'bikinis' like someone in a private beach in the Caribbean or Hawaii? I once watched her interview with Babara Walters wherein she admitted being a female who has sexual attraction for both sexes; ok, since being bisexual is somewhat being sexy and experimentation with matters of sex is not illegal. Lady Gaga could have in that interview gone a step further in clarifying her sexuality and quenching the rumoured hermaphrodite and/or dyke character; instead of the Grammy forum and in the manner she publicly "proved" it? The fact that her back-side looks too muscular and not very appetizing, sexually, did not deter her; but that may constitute some future discussion.

Our beef here is three-dimensional:- what she wore, the forum she wore it to and the lack of condemnation by the American public, particularly the media which saw nothing wrong in a Lady Gaga displaying her "beautiful vagina" and hard-knocks 'steroidal' arse in this vagrant manner?

It is very outrageous that such a warped explanation has now be invented for the biggest wardrobe malfunction of all times; which in hindsight, made the Janet Jackson's covered nipple 'accident' a child's play? This is one reason why people are very cynical and despondent with today's mass media, which they shamelessly and without caution tend to propagate a certain template as news/story, depending on who dunnit? Icheoku says, were it Beyonce or Rihanna that dared come out to that or any other stage for that matter, with their butts and/or vagina exposed in similar manner as Lady Gaga's, what would have become their fate? May be they would have been labelled 'whores', 'strippers' and not good for the children of America? A career-ending media blitzkrieg would have followed, activated with the sole objective to deliver a final blow to their careers; but no, the culprit here fits the acceptable color-scheme, and lo, she was only defending her "beautiful vagina?"

What a baloney of an explanation, and you wonder why the discordant tunes in race-relations continues and getting stronger in today's America? Icheoku for once, wished that Kanye West was around on that day to go up that stage and cover Lady Gaga's nakedness with his jacket; or better still, vocalize what many Americans felt was an indecent outfit to wear and perform in a Grammy's! We are not that conservative or hate some little teasing; no, our objection is the venue and the apparent "much ado about nothing" treatment it has thus far, received from the American mass media. Lady Gaga should not have worn that bikini-like outfit to the Grammy's and now that it is a fait-accompli, should acknowledge the impropriety of that outfit and apologise herself to millions of children and to some of us who would rather see some feminine body? The FCC should consider sanctioning the television station that failed to censure Lady Gaga's bikini lines and her rock-hard stocky buttocks; at least CBS was fined $500,000 for Janet Jackson's' wardrobe malfunction? Icheoku says, it ain't right; and without a reprimand through a strong disapproving statement of a hefty fine, one day, Lady Gaga shall push the envelope of indecent exposure all the way and appear for a performance, in her all natural outfit, the type the biblical Eve wore in the garden of Eden before the fall of man!