Us Weekly is reporting that a topless Rihanna has ‘outraged’ Irish farmer Alan Graham. How could anyone be outraged by seeing Rihanna topless? It seems the singer asked Graham if she could use his grain field to shoot a music video, and Graham agreed. But what Rihanna didn’t mention is that she’d be taking off some clothes there, too. When Graham saw the topless star, he told her to ‘cover up’ and asked them all to leave.
“I felt things were getting inappropriate,” Graham told BBC News. “I requested [Rihanna and the film crew] to stop and they did.”
One of my fellow Blisstree writers thinks this is part of a larger issue about women’s bodies and people trying to control them, or tell them what is and isn’t appropriate. If Graham agreed to let the shoot take place there in the first place, he shouldn’t have kicked them out just because Rihanna took her top off, she said—and he certainly shouldn’t be running around trying to get his name in the papers talking about it and wishing that Rihanna and her crew would ‘find God.’
None of what Graham has said strikes me as particularly offensive, though—it’s one thing to shoot a music video on someone’s property, and another to take your clothes off there. While we may wish everyone could be less puritanical about women exposing their boobs, it’s Graham’s property and if he’d prefer not to have hot, naked chicks running around on it, that’s really his prerogative. In the BBC article, I think he actually comes across like a pretty decent, reasonable dude who just has more conservative moral standards than some.
What do you think?
Sorry! This poll is now closed.
Photo: Us Weekly