17/08/2025
So the burlesque community is collectively clutching its pearls over Taylor Swift using the term showgirl. Some of you are spitting feathers, and me? Iโm sat firmly on the fence which isnt very me.
Hereโs the thing: Showgirl has history. It wasnโt just a sparkly label, it meant trained stage performers, the Folies Bergรจre, Ziegfeld Follies, women who grafted, rehearsed, danced their arses off. Prestige, artistry, and discipline. The Official Sabina Kelley Fan Page was an actual showgirl in Vegas.
But letโs not rewrite our own history here. Our community has watered that title down for years. How many times have we seen someone in a cheap eBay โVegasโ headdress and lingerie with some feathers in their hands, and marketed as a showgirl? We blurred the meaning long before Taylor got near it. Promoters do it often.
Now, is she a โclassicโ showgirl? No. Sheโs not come up through r***e or cabaret halls. But she is a stage performer with massive production value, choreography, stamina, costumes, and a global audience. In spirit, sheโs closer to a modern-day stadium-scale showgirl than most of the ring-light-and-feathers brigade some events like to tout out (also no hate because frankly we all gotta eat and pay bills).
And hereโs the bit people are missing: this might actually work in our favour. If millions of Swifties now associate showgirl with spectacle, glamour, and big live performances, do you know what that does? It makes people hungry for more. More costumes, more feathers, more nights out to see something dazzling in person. More custom work for designers, more ticket buyers for actual burlesque shows. Sheโs cracked the door open to a wider audience who might now be curious about what we do.
So yes, history matters. Yes, words matter. But so does being honest with ourselves: we diluted the title before she did. And instead of wasting energy frothing about it, maybe we should think about how to catch the wave.
Thatโs my blunt take.
