I normally take no issue with people questioning from whom public figures accept money, but in the case of Beyoncé’s recent performance in Dubai, the criticism sounds sanctimonious, and, for lack of better phrase, mighty white.
Beyoncé was paid a reported $35 million to serve as headline act at the launch party for Dubai's Atlantis The Royal, which has been billed the most luxurious hotel in the world.
From what I’ve heard about the property—namely that a suite would run you $285,000 and guests are offered a chance to meditate with dolphins while enjoying complimentary gold-plated toothbrushes, combs, and razors—it sounds like a vacation only obnoxious wealth can buy. I can see why people might be offended by such a display of excess, notably because these structures have been largely built on the backs of workers many have argued have been grossly exploited. And as a gay man who doesn’t want to be imprisoned and ultimately stoned to death over sodomy, I relate to those who look at everyone’s photos, reels, and TikToks of themselves in Dubai and think, “Not sure that’s safe for me, sis, but good for you.”
But as far as the general notion of Beyoncé being a sellout due to her performing in the country, I find the selective moralizing to be typical but no less insufferable.
Bev Jackson, co-founder of the advocacy group LGB Alliance, explained to The Daily Mail that because Beyoncé is a “huge icon,” for gay people, Jackson is “deeply disappointed” in her decision to give a “lucrative concert in Dubai where same-sex acts are a criminal offense.”
For some reason, the paper also quoted Keith McNally, the owner of the restaurant Balthazar, saying that he would give Bey a “table next to the kitchen" the next time that she dined at his restaurant due to her choice to perform there. He’s not the owner of Pappadeaux or Gracias Madre, so I’m sure she’ll be fine.
Black queer men and women are heavily targeted by police officers, but I’ve never seen white folks ask Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga to boycott events in cities where the police departments are known to hunt and kill Black people.
Meanwhile, others, like RuPaul’s Drag Race star Kitty Scott-Claus, have also criticized Beyoncé, tweeting: “Hi I have a question.. can someone explain why everyone was canceling David Beckham the other month but now celebrating Beyoncé for performing in Dubai? One rule for one and one for another?”
Most of the criticism online mirrors this sentiment from writer Douglass Greenwood: “No beef but I’m struggling to understand why Beyoncé, who has half a billion dollars, would accept 20 million dollars to make her debut performance of the Renaissance album, a record which lifts heavily from queer culture, in Dubai, a country where LGBT rights aren’t recognised.”
For the record, Dubai is not a country and Beyoncé did not perform a single song from Renaissance. Yet the crux of Greenwood’s critique (as well as many others) is this: Her last album—and arguably, huge swaths of her career—are indebted to queer culture, so why would she perform in a country hostile to queer folk?
Beyoncé is an artist, not an activist. She has donated to causes and has presented some of her beliefs in her art, but her primary job is to entertain. She should not be held to a standard that she never asked to be held by. I know most people will not accept that about her and other entertainers, but the sooner everyone does, the less disappointed in the predictable ways of rich entertainers they will be.
For argument’s sake, though, let’s say Beyoncé did take on that standard. By the logic of her critics, she would not even be able to perform in our hometown of Houston given the state government’s open hostility to queer and trans people. The same goes for states across every section of America. Depending on how nitpicky one is, Greenwood’s home country might be arguably off the list for its own reasons, too.
Where does Beyoncé perform when so many nations and societies still struggle with homophobia? And when does she factor in sexism and racism?
This logic is impractical. It also lacks sense because as I understand it, Beyoncé performed at an event by a private government, not the local government. It is not as if she sang “Pure/Honey” for the people in legislation targeting gay folks. The hotel did not write those laws and Beyoncé did not co-sign them; she collected a check.
I can confirm that some gay Black men I know were in attendance of Beyoncé’s concerts. Are they sellouts, too?
Again, this is silly and coming from people who don’t know what it’s like to be hated for more than one thing. To that point, Beyoncé’s last album is heavily influenced by Black queer culture. That difference can’t be forgotten, hence why the majority of the people criticizing Beyoncé are noticeably white people.
Black queer men and women are heavily targeted by police officers, but I’ve never seen white folks ask Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga to boycott events in cities where the police departments are known to hunt and kill Black people.
Many of Beyoncé’s critics are holding her to a standard they don’t for other white entertainers—or even themselves. I’m not saying don’t take issue with the UAE government over its anti-gay laws, but unless Beyoncé accepts the money of those actively harming gay people with state power, watch your critiques and tuck your hypocrisy back in.
This post originally appeared on Medium and is republished with author's permission. Read more of Michael Arceneaux's work on Medium.
More From LEVEL:
Comments
Leave a comment