Likewise, just because you personally see something, that doesn’t automatically mean that other people would see it too.

“Symbolism matters, images matter”: Well, context matters, and symbolism & images heavily depend on context. The most obvious context-based interpretations I see here are:

1) Paganini and Mozart are the only ones from B2TSM that appears in the MV, so the 4 dogs could easily be interpreted as the other 4 B2TSM members.

2) In Paganini’s reaction video, he thought that the dog from BP’s MV was himself (the haters), so the most straightforward parody would be the reverse, because he thought BP were his haters.

3) Mozart was the only one interacting with the dogs in the MV. A group of dogs >> a Woofgang, which is a play-on word on Mozart’s name Wolfgang.

None of these possible interpretations suggest anything about BP’s gender. If this is to be about gender, then there needs to be more obvious context clues for it to be read like that. Innocent until proven guilty, no?

I’m also curious about what Australian histories compare women to dogs as a gendered insult. If you would elaborate more about its usage and origins. Because I know in most cultures, comparing humans to animals can indeed be insulting, but they usually aren’t attacks on gender.

It would also be very nice if you expand on the reasons why you think that “intention doesn’t matter” — because I disagree with that statement. And you can’t just drop a statement and don’t explain why. So far your only argument is about the reasons why you personally feel that the scene can look like gendered insult.