How the Term “Performative” is Feeding into Society’s Misogynist Views on Mainstream Music, by Scott Torgerson

Many female musicians face higher criticism than male musicians and the term “performative” is just another layer to the same criticism that has been in the mainstream for many years.

I recently had dinner with a couple of my friends to catch up.  At one point, my friend told a story that they saw someone reading in public and called him “performative” and made fun of him for it, insinuating he fit the “performative male” stereotype. That got me thinking, has the term “performative” gone too far? 

To truly understand why this term is dangerous, it is important to understand its origins. The model for what people deem as a performative male was first mentioned in The Times article “I wouldn’t date a man reading Catcher in the Rye” by Allegra Handelsman. In this article she calls men who stare at feminist literature or philosophy books as doing it “performatively,” forming the stereotype mentioned earlier. The term was later popularized during the summer of 2025 on various social media sites such as TikTok and Instagram. Here, the model of a performative male was perfected with the tote bag, matcha, long jorts, wired headphones, Clairo, and feminist literature — all on an attractive male. It is important to note that this is a real tactic used by a lot of morally questionable men to attract women, and as such the calling out of this method was completely justifiable. Since then it has stayed in most of Gen-Z’s vocabulary, using it when  deemed fit. So why do I question if Gen-Z’s use of the term has gone too far?

The term “performative” is being dished out too freely now. I don’t think someone who listens to Clairo is inherently performative either. It is my belief that calling a man who listens to women musicians as “performative” feeds into women musicians being held at a higher standard than men. To get what I mean by this we must go over the higher standards and criticisms that women musicians face when it comes to appearance, attitude, and authenticity. 

 A musician is usually more praised if she fits into society’s expectations of beauty. If she doesn’t then she is more susceptible to hatred. A big example of this is Lizzo. Since she did not have the “ideal” body type she was more susceptible to hate. The idea started floating around that “she’s not good because she’s fat” despite the fact that she has good music. If you look at reviews  by the public of her really good 2019 album, Cuz I Love You, on albumoftheyear.org, the second highest rated review is a fat joke saying nothing about the album whatsoever! To be a “good” women musician you first must be “beautiful” because if you aren’t you’re a laughing stock. It is true, however, that men do also face a similar expectation when it comes to beauty, but not such high standards as women because if a man is wearing revealing clothing, like a rockstar being wearing tight clothing, he’s just being a rockstar, but when a woman does the same she is “appealing to the male gaze”. 

Women's attitudes are also at a higher standard than men. If a woman is too confident or too assertive she is “mean” or “difficult”. Chappell Roan is a perfect example of this. She’s confident, she’s assertive, she’s herself and yet I see her receive so much scrutiny when she asserts her boundaries. For example, in 2024, at the MTV VMA’s, she got so much hatred for yelling at a photographer who disrespected her. No one likes being disrespected and oftentimes people get heated when they feel disrespect, but when a woman does it she’s being “difficult”. A man can get on stage and spew some racist comments and only need to apologize YEARS later. This is the case with Eric Clapton in a show in the UK in 1976, he didn’t apologize until 2017. This double standard of attitude plagues the mainstream, as a woman you have to act a certain way, you can’t be too “difficult”, but if a man trashes a hotel room he’s just being a “rockstar”. 

Women are often seen as less authentic than men when it comes to music since women usually fall under the category of “pop” and, for whatever reason, pop isn’t “authentic” it’s “generic”. Musicians like Taylor Swift are called “bland” because she’s a pop-singer, even if she presents clever ideas or exceptional songwriting in albums like folklore. Online music discourse automatically disregards pop musicians like Sabrina Carpenter since she’s towards the top of the pop hierarchy. This makes it harder for women to exist in the mainstream for music if they don’t make pop music and, if they do, it’s hard for them to be taken seriously or authentically. Men who make pop hits though are seen as genius songwriters and authentic like Michael Jackson praised for him producing his own music, but when Taylor Swift does it she gets criticized for using the “same four chords”, seemingly way less authentic despite the similarities. 

So how does this relate back to the term ”performative” feeding into these standards and criticisms that plague women in mainstream music? Well, calling women musicians “performative” when a man listens to her feeds into the idea that men wouldn’t normally listen to women musicians if they didn’t fall into these very specific societal restraints. They only listen to a woman musician if she was “hot”, if she was “easy”, if she was nothing more than a pop object. A man cannot listen to an artist like Clairo because she doesn’t fit society's expectations of a mainstream woman musician, he can only do it because he is using the fact that he is listening to musicians like Clairo to attract women. Then there’s the opposite end of the spectrum when a man isn’t listening to an indie woman musician like Clairo. If a man is listening to someone like Taylor Swift he is also called “performative” because Taylor Swift is a “hot”, “easy”, pop musician that isn’t actually good. He is for sure only listening to her to attract women. A woman musician that fits the standards that are put on mainstream musicians aren’t seen as authentic, they are seen as “generic” meaning a man can’t listen to her genuinely, why would anyone listen to a “generic” artist if it wasn’t for the purpose of attracting women? Calling a woman musician “performative” feeds into these stereotypes in both of these examples. The same stereotypes women musicians have always faced in the mainstream that make it hard for women musicians to be taken seriously, to be respected. Not only that, but calling men “performative” who listen to these artists discourages getting rid of these higher standards and criticisms. 

Calling a man performative for listening to a woman musician discourages that man from listening to that same musician again and, as mentioned, implies that men normally wouldn’t listen to a woman musician. Music is a great way to gain new perspectives, limiting men to only listen to other men restrains these perspectives they otherwise wouldn’t have known before. In these perspectives men can realize the unfair standards and criticism that women musicians face in the mainstream. Music brings perspectives but calling this action “performative” limits this heavily. Clearly the excessive application of the  term is flawed and even though most aren’t intentionally feeding into these misogynistic views, unconsciously these ideas are still lingering and being kept alive. It’s time to be more limited on our use of “performative” when describing men. If you see a man in public reading feminist literature or thought-provoking philosophy with a tote bag around his shoulder and matcha in hand, just be aware of what his intentions might be. If he is doing it out of appreciation and respect and not to only attract women, let the men listen to Clairo.