In the last few years, we've seen many females having a big impact on pop culture, even completely changing the pop landscape (Madonna, Britney, Christina and more) but during all those years, there has been no male that has truly affected the pop culture.There have been some successful males (Justin Timberlake, Usher) but their impact on pop culture is not really noteworthy.In previous decades, we had MJ, Elvis, David Bowie and even the boy bands in the early 90's that were true phenomenons and created a revolution.But ever since, there has been no male with such a tremendous contribution.And judging by the current crop of male artists, I don't see anyone that can have such an impact.For example, could you imagine a male becoming as huge in every aspect of pop culture as GaGa was from 2008 to 2010???

I was just wondering...why don't we have any powerful males in pop right now??Is it because men don't really buy pop music and the males in the industry have to use their sex appeal (and therefore become rather shallow) to appeal to girls???Is it because men cannot re-invent their image as easily as the ladies?Or is it because the industry tends to play it safe???

I think guys feel compelled to be in a band for the most part...

The telegraph had an article on this a few months ago, which makes a few interesting points. Although it's more of a response to the female dominance seen in recent years as opposed to the entire decade.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/m...s-allowed.html

I certainly think Rihanna or Beyonce prancing about in leotards are more likely to get the ladies going "Woo! You go girl" than Jason Derulo or Justin Timberlake tearing their shirts off would do so for the guys. Straight guys anyway.

Thank you for posting the link.It does make some interesting points indeed and I have noticed that guys get very little attention right now, especially in the pop genre, but I'm just trying to find what's missing.What does the public demand from a male artist that the likes of Justin Timberlake, Usher and Chris Brown cannot offer?

It's a vicious cycle of society dictating what is and isn't generally acceptable for a male popstar to be, and therefore male popstars do not take any risk in challenging that incase it hinders their success. Hell, they probably wouldn't even be signed if they don't conform to;

1) MJ mould of R&B/pop, slick dance moves etc.
2) Serious singer/songwriter, or at least faking it, usually mid/slow tempo love songs. Guitar optional.
3) Front man to dance music.
4) Assigned to boyband.
5) Hip-hop-pop act.

That may look varied, but really...when you consider the breadth of female popstars we've had in the past decade alone, it's pitiful. From Beyonce to Gaga to Pink to Adele to Shakira to Alicia Keys to Madonna to Britney.

For the guys, we have Calvin Harris/Example/Taio Cruz/Tinie Tempah/Dizzie Rascal types, then Justin Timberlake/Jason Derulo/Neyo/Chris Brown/Usher/Bieber types and then Bruno Mars/Jason Mraz/Paolo Nutini types.

Now that dance is popular, it all sounds similar, bleeding into one another. The only difference is seemingly their performance style (i.e. stand and bounce or MJ routines).

It's hard to even contemplate a male version of Gaga these days. They don't have the balls.

Artistry? None of them are remotely comparable to Elvis, Michael Jackson, Bowie, Prince, Stevie Wonder etc. at all. There isn't even a male equivalent of Lady Gaga.

Chris Brown and Usher are talented singers and dancers, but there is not an artistic, musical or cultural bone in their bodies. Their songs are generic club RnB claptrap about dancing and love. They were flung into the industry at a very young age and never given the time to mature as intellectuals or people so there is just no artistic value there whatsoever. It's music designed to sell and to dance to, that's all, nothing wrong with that, but then we get Usher trying to pretend he's the successor to Michael Jackson and everyone just laughs at him.

The only true male solo artists in the charts are rappers like Eminem, Kanye or (as a native British variant) Plan B. In some ways, though, the domination of rap in the past ten years has been bad, because every male solo artist has to play up to this hardman, 'street' archetype to be taken seriously and any sight of an actual instrument sends the masses of idiots running. Then we get the lower rung of solo males who churn out very generic, lazy and identikit songs like Chipmunk, Example, Mike Posner and so on, and then lower than that Cowell's puppets who don't last very long.

Some male solo artists are out of that entire orbit like Cee Lo Green but they're sort of trapped if they don't get hits. The traditional musos and weird artists who have indie cred like Patrick Wolf and iamx are okay but imo their songs are not quite good enough to make that transition to appealing to a lot of people.

I honestly think that Chris Brown's label has found the PERFECT receipe.He brings out songs like 'Yeah 3x' and 'She Ain't You' that the ladies love and then he also has songs like 'Look At Me Now' that the guys enjoy too.He has a clean-cut image that the girls like and then he also has kind of a more rough-hood image for the guys.And of course, he takes his shirt off quite frequently in concerts and wears some weird clothes too (so he is not THAT far from a fashion icon).But of course, Chris messed up and lost his mainstream appeal because of what he did to Rihanna and the industry is kind of stuck in stereotypes, so just the fact that he's black would be a considerable obstacle on his way to super stardom.

Cee-Lo Green has strong career potential I think; I can imagine both sexes appreciating his music. Unfortunately, the new song is a dud so it may be a bit premature to call him a saviour.

It's definetely harder for hip-hop artist to affect the pop culture though.I don't see it happening.

A possible explanation is that males don't have anything left to prove, while females do.Men have dominated in ALL the genres in the past and if you think about it, the males were the ones to start new genres or set new trends back then.In that era, there were very few females in the industry and they had to tick certain boxes to get a record deal (exactly like men do now).Therefore, when it comes to men, it may have all been said and done for now, but females are just beginning to dominate.So is this just a case of a 'your turn'-'my turn' kind of route?

Madonna, Elvis, The Beatles, The ROlling Stones, Michael Jackson,David Bowie, Andy Warhol....

THESE are the pioneers of Pop Culture. Wherever and whatever happens people will be compared to, in the shadow of or have a standard similar to these names! Or branch off from them with other iconic figures (ie - Jim Morrison, Kate Bush, Bjork, Led Zeppelin, Amy Winehouse, Debbie Harry, Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Kylie Minogue and other CULT figures and legends and icons to follow suit) The reason why there is no predominant Male in Pop is because women in music are shaping the industry at the moment.

RIhanna, Beyonce, Lady gaga, Adele, Florence & The Machine, Jessie J, Katy Perry, Katy B, Janelle Monae.....from the top of my head. Only 4 weeks of the chart this year in total have been taken the pole spot for 4 weeks (Bruno Mars, Foo Fighters and Arctic Monkeys) The rest of the bigger sellers are female! The reason simply (as i always find) female artists can be more connected to then a lot of male artists. Personally a lot of the contemporary male artists/bands i love are not in the mainstream Pop climate (Friendly Fires, Foster The People, The Naked & Famous (co singer), Bon Iver, Foals, Damon Albarn (gorillaz, Blur) etc) the closest are the two Justins who do nothing for me NOW (Timberlake i found an appeal for though, but post 2008...nowt!)

I do feel that soon there may be a male artist to challenge the grade! Someone who can rack up the sales like Adele or gaga, become an icon over so many years like Beyonce or Britney etc. But that will be in the long run....nothing is ever impossible!

Nah. Both him and Usher are very successful in the charts but they're the prototypical example of a short term investment. There's nothing remotely 'iconic' about Chris Brown. He is just another black guy with a shaved head wearing sunglasses, baggy trousers, 'the glove' and sneakers doing showy dance moves and singing in falsetto on generic songs. There have been dozens of those since the early 90s and not a Michael or a Prince among them. They appeal to a ghetto audience, occasionally crossing over to the mainstream with a decent song, and that is it, that is their purpose, rinse and repeat.

You're right and that also kind of proves my theory that males have accomplished SOOOO much that now it HAS to be the females' turn.
(Sorry for not putting Madonna's name in bold, I just wanted to isolate the males to prove my point)

Please dont say you are sorry

What i also find uncanny with it is that Madonna had Marylin Monroe and Debbie Harry as two sources of musical influences (amongst others such as Frida Khalo, Sly & The Family Stone, Led Zeppelin whom she has mentioned as influences in interviews in her early days and also in recent interviews) yet she was NEVER in the shadow of Debbie nor Marylin because she managed to change it up early on in her career and while not surpassing their resspective iconographies (one is a massive Hollywood icon and the other is a massive cult based music icon) Madonna has become a legendary figure up there with them due to how her music has evolved, her impact in pop culture 4 decades in already etc.

And Madonna thus far is the only one to challenge it!

Britney Spears and Beyonce from my perspective are the recent female icons in music to represent and start this new-wave and era of females in the industry....it is remarkable....while BOTH state Madonna (as well as Prince, MJ etc/ as an influence they are both so different in that respect also which is WHY they are regarded the way they are. Similar with Kylie and Janet Jackson who now are very CULT based and relatively successful in what they do.

And yes agreed that NOW it is a female run in the industry. I reckon RIhanna and Lady gaga will continue for the decade having different lows and peaks. Beyonce will still be here, Britney will become a more cult figure etc.etc. and again Pop Culture will change and shape itself.

But the aforementioned names (whom you also highlighted in bold) are still and always will be in the centre and the core of how Pop Culture changes in performance, entertainment, art, music, singing, presence, marketing, business, promotion.....those names have it all!

Of course they're short term and disposable, like pretty much everyone that's in the game right now.In this thread, I wasn't asking why there is no potential male legend.I just asked why there's no male truly huge in terms of pop culture, like Britney was in 1999 and 2000 and GaGa was in 2009 and 2010.
It's obvious that there is no male soon-to-be-legend, but a pop icon doesn't have to be a legend AT ALL.I'm just wondering why the pop audience doesn't bother about guys at all.

Perhaps then, the next logical step for a male popstar is for an out gay man to succeed?

We've explored race and gender. Orientation, and taking that kind of oppression to pop culture is what's left to explore.

Yes, but Madonna was a genius!She took some elements of other icons (every artist takes elements of other artists) but she did it in a slick and subtle way, without looking desperate to reach them and be like them.
Madonna worked like a clever producer would if he wanted to sample a song to create a new tune.She borrowed all these elements, but it was barely noticeable, it never looked/sounded like a copy+paste kind of thing and she mixed it all to create something bigger and better.

A gay man!Why not???Women would find him cute, gay men would support him and some racists that would bash him would add to his buzz.Excellent idea!

Why would a racist bash him if he's gay ?

Oh, and btw, by no means does Usher appeal to a ghetto audience.In ghetto terms, he's a softie.
And Usher was never a cross-over act in the past, because back then r n'b was still huge and it was considered mainstream.From 1998 to 2005, he was slaying, but then he lost his understanding of the industry and had to sell out.But even now, he doesn't have to cross-over.The mainstream will care enough anyway.

Just thought I'd throw this out there as I now have it on the mind, does anyone think a guy doing something akin to what Gaga is doing now would actually be accepted? To the extent that they could sit at the top of mainstream music? Of course David Bowie had Ziggy Stardust and Freddie Mercury was always flamboyant, but part of me thinks it just wouldn't resonate with people anymore. Going even further than that, could a gay male singer hit these similar heights if they were open from the very start of their career? That would certainly buck the trend...

Sorry, wrong term.I meant sexist.

got it in one! and that is one of the reasons why i love her! she is effing genius with it. And still to this day no one knows how she will change it up next in image, sound, vocals etc....brilliant!

And i love that she did and does still take influence (as you say....who doesnt!) from elements and different areas and really make is MADONNA!

I think that is where some female artists stumble....its always "who will be the NEXT Madonna?" "Like Madonna" "Madonna did it better" "Madonna rip-off" "successor to Madonna" etc. Which Lady gaga, Katy Perry, Rihanna are three big names already accused and often taken down for it....and that is where they each stumbled a lot, they took an element BUT didnt make it work. Whereas now look at how each have progressed and each different will become memorable Pop Icons surely too. But the interesting prospect is that they will forever be in a shadow of the Pioneers of Pop Culture (love the ring of that!) there will always be a "like Madonna....Like MJ...Like Warhol etc.etc."

and i love the idea of reaching Orientation toanythingtaboo, a predominently unstereotyped gay man in Pop music that can reach mainstream appeal WILL work! Adam Lambert thus far is the closest to it (i like him but i feel he is too far in a niche!)

Argh! Beat me to it . It would be interesting, to say the least.

Didn't Boy George do that almost 30 years ago ? (OK he crashed and burned but he did succeed for a while)