The song “Dunka mig gul och blå” (“Thump me yellow and blue”) is a big hit all over Sweden but nevertheless Radio Kronoberg and Radio Blekinge has decided to remove the song from their charts. According to the Swedish newspaper Expressen, the reason for banning the song is that it is considered sexist and offensive to women.

Advocating violence against women?
Muranius is singing about a woman who is out in a club, getting drunk and looking for a man to have sex with. They go home and “play all night” and she wants him to “thump her yellow and blue”. According to Muranius, “thump” equals “fuck hard” in her lyrics. She is playing with words and describes the sex act through metaphors. In the morning she throws the man out and goes to work. The next evening she wants to party again. She sings that she is looking for someone warm up her bed, “maybe a girl this time”.

Radio Kronoberg has decided to ban the song because they interpret the lyrics as making fun about violence against women. Erica Hedin, head of the radio station, tells Expressen that this is a “problem in our society and nothing to make fun about”.

“Playing doctor”
Muranius herself refuses to see it as a sexist song. “How can it be sexist? The song is about a woman who picks up a man to have good sex. (…) The radio station’s decision shows that it is not ok for a woman to enjoy sex, while there are rap songs oppressing women on the air”, she tells Expressen. She understands that the song could be misinterpreted – but she emphasizes that she is against violence and oppression.

Tanja Suhinina writes in a debate article in Expressen that it should be pretty obvious that Muranius’ lyrics are not to be interpreted literally. They consist of metaphors not indicating violent sex but a playful mix of “playing doctor” and jumping around in bed.

Censorship or not?
It is rare for a female artist to be as outspoken about sexuality as Muranius is in her song and the fact that the song is in Swedish makes it more evident to the listeners than if it would have been in English. The head of Radio Kronoberg says that it’s the public radio’s responsibility not to play songs that are offensive or that speak about people as unequal. But she refuses to call it censorship. In the Swedish radio program “Studio Ett”, she says that these ethical choices are made every day. What’s different about this time is that the radio’s choice became public. “People can make any music they want – but the radio has no obligation to play it”, she says.

Debate
The ban was soon widely known in the country and followed by strong reactions in columns, web blogs and radio debates. People either loved the song or hated it. Almost over a night Muranius had become a pop star and all of a sudden she was also the center of an intellectual debate about women’s sexuality. But Muranius finds some of the deep analyses of her song a bit ridiculous. “It was a joke, who cares, people can fuck the way they want, can’t they?” she tells the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter.

However, the debate remains a fact. The subject has evoked reactions in such widely different places that its actuality cannot be ignored. The author Carina Rydberg writes in a debate article that she is tired of the image of women always having to be in love to have sex. “Why is the sexual intercourse not valid if the woman is not doing it with her heart?” she writes in Dagens Nyheter. When Rydberg first heard the song she was laughing, thinking that “this is how it is” – being young, partying and meeting new men. She is upset by the interpretations about the woman as a victim.

Who is the victim?
Rydberg compares Muranius’ song to another Swedish rock song called “Varning på stan” (“Warning the city”) by the male artist Magnus Uggla. Today the song is a rock classic but it caused a similar debate 30 years ago when it appeared. The interesting part is how the two songs are interpreted differently. When a man picks up a woman to have sex, as in Uggla’s song, he is taking advantage of her. But when a woman does the same thing to a man, she does not know what’s best for her and thus she remains the victim. Muranius herself says in “Studio Ett” that if there is a victim in the song – it’s the man.

Women’s sexuality challenging norms
During the radio debate in “Studio Ett”, the academic Sara Johnsdotter underlines that it’s important not only to focus on problems when it comes to women’s sexuality. Johnsdotter and four other researchers have written a debate article in the newspaper Sydsvenskan, pointing out that the song is a good example of a woman who knows what she wants and who is not ashamed of enjoying sex. This goes against the general heterosexual norm and so does the fact that she is not only open to men but also to other women as sexual partners.

Muranius’ song is provoking because it’s challenging norms in the borderland between “good” and “bad” sexuality. According to Johnsdotter and her colleagues, our interpretation of the song is mainly due to our view of the woman as an active or victimized person.

Not always flowers, butterflies and birds
The song is discussed in the academic world as well as in average courtyards and Internet blogs. A lot of women loves the song and admires Muranius for her outspokenness. The signature “Kimmi” writes on her blog “Åsiktskanonen”: “Sometimes this is how it is. Sometimes you just want to get drunk, let the alcohol make someone handsome and have a nice lay. It’s not always time for flowers, butterflies and birds.”