next »

[picklestix]

I personally like to call everything "rad" since I work with radioactivity.  It's double the fun.

[oldchair]

The two issues should not be confused.  Imus should not be allowed to hide behind the excuse "It's ok to say it, as long as the black folks do."  He should be judged on the stupidity of his own actions, not on agreement with song lyrics that do not pertain to him in any way.  How can it be a consistency issue when the subjects are totally unrelated?
Perhaps I am just annoyed about a different side of the issue.  The consistency issue is currently being used more to condone his actions more than anything, and I would rather he be held responsible for a personal character attack than for improper use of whatever terms he thinks he can be down with, since he's such a dope-fly old-school homie, yo.

The OP certainly did not condone Imus's actions.  Far from it.  In fact, I've no read anyone who has even defended Imus.  But I don't understand how you can say his comments are unrelated to rap lyrics.  He described African American women using the sexist/racist language used to describe African American women in rap lyrics.  Why do we recognize and punish these actions only when they are committed by a white man.  Let's go back to the OP's questions.

Why do we allow African-American men a greater freedom of misogyny than white men?  Why does African-American women's dignity only count when it's being attacked by a white man?

[dr_dre]

Al Sharpton is talking about turning toward others next who use these types of expressions. He's framing this as the first step in a longer battle.

[oldchair]

Al Sharpton is talking about turning toward others next who use these types of expressions. He's framing this as the first step in a longer battle.

Oh, please.  This is the stupidest thing I've read in ages.  First step in a larger battle?  Where's he been the past twenty years? 

[picklestix]

The two issues should not be confused.  Imus should not be allowed to hide behind the excuse "It's ok to say it, as long as the black folks do."  He should be judged on the stupidity of his own actions, not on agreement with song lyrics that do not pertain to him in any way.  How can it be a consistency issue when the subjects are totally unrelated?
Perhaps I am just annoyed about a different side of the issue.  The consistency issue is currently being used more to condone his actions more than anything, and I would rather he be held responsible for a personal character attack than for improper use of whatever terms he thinks he can be down with, since he's such a dope-fly old-school homie, yo.

The OP certainly did not condone Imus's actions.  Far from it.  In fact, I've no read anyone who has even defended Imus.  But I don't understand how you can say his comments are unrelated to rap lyrics.  He described African American women using the sexist/racist language used to describe African American women in rap lyrics.  Why do we recognize and punish these actions only when they are committed by a white man.  Let's go back to the OP's questions.

[/quote]

If I cursed in Russian (Which apparently requires a great deal of creativity and talent), would it be fair to say my offensive behavior was related to the Russians? Imus's comments are not related to rap music.  He used someone else's manner of speak to say something offensive.  

Why do we allow African-American men a greater freedom of misogyny than white men?  Why does African-American women's dignity only count when it's being attacked by a white man?


Racism has taken on many interesting forms, hasn't it?  African-American men and women went for many years without much of a voice in the U.S.  Rap was one of the first truly successful (profitable) ventures which was mainly an African-American art form.  It was also a way to communicate issues of the  African-American community.  However, as can easily be seen by the popularity of shock radio and reality t.v., the buying public likes for entertainment to become more and more shocking.  The more bad words, the more records are sold, the more people listen to the radio shows, and so on.  Never listened to Howard Stern, but doesn't he attack women's dignity all the time?  Isn't he white? Maybe there is more public outcry when there is between race bashing than within race bashing.  So it seems like whatever people find entertaining, they are willing to put up with, even if it is a gross mix of racism, sexism, and consumerism.  

[prytania3]

It's not about consistency, and the only judges that count are corporate sponsors, and they were pulling out. They don't have to be consistent--they can advertise where they want. The decision to can Imus was about economics and nothing more.

Yes. Isn't that what did in "Politically Incorrect?" (I was on that show, btw :-)).

Exact same thing. But Bill Maher's back on the air--let us know if you're on the show again.

[oldchair]

If I cursed in Russian (Which apparently requires a great deal of creativity and talent), would it be fair to say my offensive behavior was related to the Russians? Imus's comments are not related to rap music.  He used someone else's manner of speak to say something offensive. 

Oh, come on.  It's not that he used someone else's "manner of speak" to say something offensive.  He used the same offensive words as are used with impunity by rappers.  Your analogy to Russian is banal, and his comments are related to rap music.  Both discourses use the same words to make the same demeaning statement about African American women.

Your quoted argument--" Rap was one of the first truly successful (profitable) ventures which was mainly an African-American art form--doesn't excuse anything.   

Please answer the OP's original questions.

[picklestix]

If I cursed in Russian (Which apparently requires a great deal of creativity and talent), would it be fair to say my offensive behavior was related to the Russians? Imus's comments are not related to rap music.  He used someone else's manner of speak to say something offensive. 

Oh, come on.  It's not that he used someone else's "manner of speak" to say something offensive.  He used the same offensive words as are used with impunity by rappers.  Your analogy to Russian is banal, and his comments are related to rap music.  Both discourses use the same words to make the same demeaning statement about African American women.

Your quoted argument--" Rap was one of the first truly successful (profitable) ventures which was mainly an African-American art form--doesn't excuse anything.  

Please answer the OP's original questions.

Why do we allow African-American men a greater freedom of misogyny than white men?  Why does African-American women's dignity only count when it's being attacked by a white man?


The American Public is one big nappy headed ho.  Or maybe a pimp. 
Do you really think the two questions above are answerable in a few sentences or a few paragraphs? Aside from being sweeping generalizations, of course.  Please, do answer them yourself. 

[oldchair]

The American Public is one big nappy headed ho. 

That is an answer.  Thank you.

[picklestix]

The American Public is one big nappy headed ho. 

That is an answer.  Thank you.

Crap, I was going to bet for pimp.

[oldchair]

I don't have an answer.  For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone tolerates the hateful, violent, misogynistic racist crap found in rap. For all that, I don't know anyone could fail to be offended by Borat, but from the comments posted elsewhere in these fora, I learn that I'm just a simpleton who doesn't appreciate art.  For the record, I would no more consider the lyrics offered above from Guns & Roses legitimate art form than I would burn the works of Shakespeare.

 I'm glad Imus is paying a price for his words.  The fact that he faces consequences from the marketplace (lost sponsors) gives me some hope that the free market can co-exist with a reasonable system of values.  I hope his words cause our nation to re-examine how we use language, and I hope we gain the courage as private citizens to speak out against language that dehumanizes.  Let's just not make excuses.  Imus is wrong because he made a joke and attempted to profit from words that rob human beings of dignity.  Anyone who does likewise is similarly wrong.

[sibyl]

Imus shouldn't say it.  Eminem shouldn't say it.  Wanda Sykes shouldn't say it.  Nas and Li'l Kim shouldn't say it.  Nobody should say it.

You can't catch everyone who says it.  You also can't catch everyone who drives drunk.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't catch who you can.

[oldchair]

The beauty is you don't even have to catch them, just refuse to buy the products sold by the people who profit from them.

[prytania3]

Imus shouldn't say it.  Eminem shouldn't say it.  Wanda Sykes shouldn't say it.  Nas and Li'l Kim shouldn't say it.  Nobody should say it.

You can't catch everyone who says it.  You also can't catch everyone who drives drunk.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't catch who you can.

It's not about "catching" anyone. Nas, L'il Kim and Eminem make money and no one's complaining.

In the case of Imus, there were complaints, and sponsors pulled out because there are other places to advertise and Imus could lose them money.

It's about money. It's always about money. It's never about anything else.

[dolljepopp]

I thought he said "nicely-heeded hus," but obviously I was mistaken...