Illinois Family Institute Are Not Grammy (Or Beyonce) Fans

By Lisa White in Arts & Entertainment on Jan 28, 2014 10:45PM

While many of us were either bored to tears by hour three or covering our ears to protect them from the screeching wail of Madonna during the Grammy awards Sunday night, one particular group of Illinoisans were feeling extra offended and felt the need to perfectly punctuate why.

Fans of dramatic dictionary usage, the Illinois Family Institute, published their thoughts on the broadcast, which included a lot of slut shaming towards Beyoncé, some confusion on what exactly constitutes as a “private part” and of course, a lot of anger over Macklemore’s “Same Love” marriage equality performance.

First, you can find the article in full here. That said, depending on your personal views, you many not want to give them the page click. Have no fear, I’ll sum up the best parts for you. Second, we do have to give author Laurie Higgins credit where credit is due. According to her bio, Higgins worked “full-time for eight years in Deerfield High School’s writing center.” I'm hoping she worked in creative writing, because she has one helluva way with words! The article itself is one thing, but Higgins verbiage really makes it soar. Kudos on your wordplay, Laurie!

The article starts out by bluntly stating that the nights “tragic freak show” was a “gawdy spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.” This sounds like a tagline or personal motto for an amazing drag queen. Someone snap that line up for use, quickly! Then Higgins goes on to pontificate about Beyonce and her “half-revealed derriere” and her “dance” moves that “simulated sex and stimulated sexual appetite, while the crowd cheered in puerile excitement.” Higgins goes on to talk about Jay-Z reveling in “the lustings of strangers for his wife” and compares him to a pimp if he enjoys this because of money. You know, because Beyoncé and her career are truly only measured by what her husband thinks. God forbid her husband is simply being a supportive partner proud of his wife and her career.

Before asking a series of questions, Higgins claims that Beyoncé has “abused her power as a beloved role model for young girls to teach them terrible lessons about sexuality and marriage.” Okay, no one made Beyoncé a role model for young girls and if you are letting your small child listen an unedited version of “Partition,” that is on you. What are these terrible lessons Beyoncé is teaching to age appropriate women? That mothers and wives can be sexual beings that love their bodies? That married people do sexual things with consenting partners? The horror! If anything, Beyoncé owning her sexuality is a positive thing for married women across the nation. Throw on some underwear that makes your ass look amazing and ride your husband/wife/partner/consenting lover off into the sunset! Sex is a part of marriage usually, why not celebrate having a healthy sex life?

Higgins then lists a series of questions, like what motivates a “young married mother” to “flaunt her partially-exposed sexual anatomy to the world and simulate sex movements?” Oh, I must have missed the part of the Grammys where Beyoncé partially exposed her vagina or anus, the parts of anatomy usually reserved for sex. The bottom of a butt cheek is not sexual anatomy and neither is cleavage. And what motivates her? That doesn’t matter. Higgins also asks if “deep down, is this what she truly wants?” Yes, lets shame a woman for feeling beautiful and confident in her body and with her relationship with her husband. Of course Higgins brings Beyoncé's husband, child and father into her argument, because a female and her worth or decisions can never stand independent, it must be in relation to what a man thinks of her. And because trying to guilt someone about if they would like it if their toddler became a stripper is such a classy high brow move.

Higgins then tries to talk about “private parts” without actually naming any anatomical terms.

“What kind of mixed message does this performance send to children? Parents and pediatricians tell children that parts of their bodies are “private parts” that only parents and doctors should look at or touch. We convey that message to them from the earliest prepubescent ages. So, what happens after sexual maturity. Do those “private parts” suddenly become public parts?”

Can people stop saying the word private parts and just say penis and vagina already? I’ll give Higgins the benefit of the doubt given her background and assume she is also lumping in breasts and butts into the term “private parts.” Beyoncé was not performing for children Sunday night. The show was in the evening hours, if you allow your child to watch it, that is on the parent.

There's also this bit of information: Beyoncé did not actually show any of her full “private parts.” She wore underwear on-stage that showed some of her butt at the bottom. Finally, Higgins’s point is moot because she doesn’t bring up consent. A child being told not to let anyone touch their “private parts” is vastly different than a woman wanting to wear something that showcases culturally sexualized parts of her body by her own choice. When your child matures, it is your responsibility as a parent to explain to them that no one should be allowed to touch their body unless they give consent. And it is your job to explain the cultural situation we are in when it comes to sexualizing the female form, for better or for worse. She ends by calling Beyoncé's performance anti-woman (not true) and anti-marriage (once again, not true). I'm guessing she hasn't read Beyoncé's own take on feminism? I'd also venture a guess Higgins doesn’t subscribe to the same brand of feminism, if any at all.

Higgins then throws vitriolic wordplay towards all things marriage equality, but that is old hat and shoe for the Illinois Family Institute. We know they are clearly not fans of marriage equality or gay rights. She did get a good jab at Madonna, calling her “Dorian Gray-esque” with a “faux-face.” Whether you believe homosexuality is a sin or not, I think we can all agree that Madonna’s performance Sunday night was wretched. Higgins describes the scene in vivid furor before claiming that “it was a non-wedding festooned with all the indulgent gimcrackery of Satan’s most alluring playground: Hollywood.” Once again, “Satan’s most alluring playground” sounds like a great tagline for something deliciously sinful, have at it folks.

Higgins babbles on some more, hating on homosexuals and their supporters, the usual agenda for the IFI. Then she leaves the dear readers with this totally coherent thought of an ending.

“Conservatives argue that sexual complementarity is as fundamental to marriage as romantic-erotic feelings and “binariness.” Jettisoning the essential constituent feature of sexual complementarity represents the destruction of marriage. Self-righteous Grammy “sintertainers” just hammered another nail in the cultural coffin of marriage.”

Sintertainers hammering the nail in the cultural coffin of marriage once again sounds like another great tag line for adult entertainment. If Higgins ever has a change of heart and stops shaming women for expressing their sexuality, we think she could have a bright future writing copy for a few adult industries. For now, we’ll keep hurling our gawdy spitballs at the eye of the holy God as we dance around in Target to “Drunk In Love” on our iPods while buying wedding gifts for all the homosexual weddings of friends and family members we’ll soon attend this summer in Illinois.