Reply With Quote
I think the issue with the misogyny in different genres of music is its subtlety. In rock, you may actually have to listen to a few lines to decipher the meaning while in rap it's far less ambiguous and play out word for word "the is gonna suck my "
Um of course I can. I guess because Mick Jagger calls the woman in question a dog instead of a (x 224908209482 ) its much better. I'd love to see you tell me on what grounds Under My Thumb has some kind of moral high ground here.
I think the issue with the misogyny in different genres of music is its subtlety. In rock, you may actually have to listen to a few lines to decipher the meaning while in rap it's far less ambiguous and play out word for word "the is gonna suck my "
Are you saying subtly makes it better or OK? I'm not even sure rock music is very subtle with it, but thats another point.
There's an element of subtlety that you have to consider. Play "Under My Thumb" to a 14 year old and ask him what the song was about (if he's still paying attention by the end).Um of course I can. I guess because Mick Jagger calls the woman in question a dog instead of a (
I'd absolutely say it's preferable.
The portrayals of women in 90's rap videos by artists that are revered by critics as hip hop legends is as misogynistic as, if not worse than, the portrayals of women in 80's glam metal videos that are now widely (and rightfully) panned and mocked for their dated sexism.
There's absolutely a ton of examples of misogyny in rock, but they are not celebrated or forgiven to the degree that we celebrate and forgive misogyny in hip hop (because it's part of the "culture").
I'm against censorship, and I think what is popular within a genre is not a fair picture of the genre as a whole. By the early nineties, hip hop had grown into a great art form and had the potential to do a lot of social good while being entertaining as well. Then The Chronic exploded and there was no air time for ATCQ or KRS One.
I don't typically make judgement by what 14 year olds can or can't decipher nor do I use the judgement of 14 year olds to set my bar on what cons utes misogyny. If somehow subtle misogyny is better to you guys then I don't know what to tell you.
I don't even think Under My Thumb is the slightest bit in subtle, to be quite honest. The lyrics are extremely overt. Now, do I think most of the population is too stupid to realize what they are listening to? Yeah, I do, but that doesn't just apply to rock listeners.
exactly. Never heard that specific song but your point is exactly what I was thinking of
It's more subtle than " es Ain't ," can we agree on that?
The portrayal of women overall in the 90s changed over the 80s. You think Jersey shore would have aired in the 80s? Are you going to tell me thats a rap issue as well?
This is what you guys don't seem to understand. You keep trying to pin the misogyny tail on the rap when the donkey is our society. The whole idea that misogyny is OK or better because its more subtle is an absolute crock of .
I'd say that "Under My Thumb" is just as misogynistic, but more "artistic", which gives it a little more leeway IMHO. Of course, YMMV.Um of course I can. I guess because Mick Jagger calls the woman in question a dog instead of a (
I always pictured "Under My Thumb" to be about a guy who likes to abuse women, but not necessarily a true-to-life personification of Mick Jagger himself. It's in the same vein that Eminem plays the real-life/fake character back-and-forth, which allows him to say things that normally would be out-of-line.
Its not. He calls her a dog. Mick Jagger calls her a dog. He doesn't curse, but I don't think calling someone a and calling someone a dog are exactly different at all.
The whole concept of subtly even mattering is lost on me entirely. If someone says to me "You've got the brain power of a pile of feces" they might as well have said "you're as dumb as " because its the same damn thing.
Uhm.... that's not what subtlety is.
No , thats my point and thats basically what you're saying if you're saying Under My Thumb is somehow subtly and not overtly misogynistic.
Not saying it's okay, just that it's preferable. Also saying that we seem afraid to shun misogyny in hip hop that we openly and unapologetically shun in other art forms.
And we haven't even begun to talk about phobia either.
Saying its preferable is completely wrong. There should be no relativism here.
It's definitely way more subtle in rock, on average, compared to what you hear in rap. And of course it doesn't make it OK, or better, but it changes the cir stances. It causes the majority of society casually listening to the misogynistic rock song to often not even notice the misogyny right when it's playing in the music. It's something you can easily hide from kids, and you can't say the same about vulgar, misogynistic rap songs. Why else are moms like Judd and you can imagine a great proportion of them thinking the same, while disregarding or indirectly accepting the more hidden misogyny in rock? Of course I don't have stats on this, but I'd imagine more people complain about it in rap music and that at least may support the fact that it's way more blatant in rap music. And, not only more blatant, but probably more frequent as well, but again that's my opinion. You have your misogynistic hit every now and then, but I don't see it as a focal point like in rap. In gangsta rap albums, it's tough to go a whole verse, let alone song, without it bukkakeing all over the es, so to speak.
I'm not really trying to aim to a certain position on this issue, I see little point in arguing over whether rap and rock are more/less misogynistic on average. Just spewing some opinion myself. In my opinion, African Americans aren't any more or less misogynistic than other races, so I don't think it's anything black-related going on here, although race may certainly play a factor in this argument for many. Like somebody already hinted at, I think the trend can precisely be an extended trend, and soon enough you'll see a shift out of the current level of misogyny in rap and/or a shift in the popular music genre on radio as a whole. Both could easily happen simultaneously.
One thing in my opinion is for certain though, artists are simply running out of material, if most haven't already. A true legendary artist has tons to say over the course of their musical careers, while the majority are simply different people than that. We aren't all poetic legends, but sooo many people want to be not only a rock star or rapper, but also famous. When you're like your average hood rapper and you're just trying to get by and make a living, you're probably doing just that, and your inspiration may be different from the few true artists. For next album material ideas, you might ask yourself, "What will sell?" instead of "What do I really have to say to the world?" In my opinion, there's not enormous room for more to be said, relatively, in terms of the latter question. The majority of artists are trying to sell, and probably not trying to create. They'd be doing something different if the music wasn't paying.
Also, phobia goes far outside the realm of rap music. Just like misogny, its present but it doesn't start there.
People seeking the answers to why these elements are present in the music shouldn't start in the music. Thats like treating the flu with cough drops.
I think we can do both. We can shun artists that celebrate misogyny and phobia and we can address why they are such popular topics for artistic content within all genres.
I think phoia is widespread throughout the music industry. I'm dating myself, but I remember what a shock it was to hear "Immigrants and gots, they make no sense to me/they come to our country and spread some ing disease" from GnR. Never saw them quite the same way after that.
Society simply needs to change for everybody's own good. We should be looking towards pop music as well, parents in cars need to stop allowing their 10 year old girls to listen to stupid ass ing music.
When you have all of the young girls of the world singing:
Dumb ass deserved to get her ass knocked out, Rihanna knows 90% of her success depends on dumb little girls.Come here, rude boy, boy; can you get it up?
Come here rude boy, boy; is you big enough?
Take it, take it baby, baby
Take it, take it; love me, love me
Tonight I'ma let it be fire
Tonight I'ma let you take me higher
Tonight, baby, we could get it on, yeah, we could get it on, yeah
This sort of ties in to my degrees of subtleness argument, pertaining to rap and other genres. In rock, in my opinion it usually gets by, no one cares. In pop/Rihanna/Beyonce/Ke$ha and all of the other horrible "artists" in the genre, the songs can very easily be heard under a different perception since they can be very fast paced and seem innocent, have trouble trying to explain my thoughts but perhaps you get the point. In rap, more often than not you're listening to an angry voice talk the vulgar phrases into the mic; it's what gangsta rap is. Being angry and vulgar on the mic, and talking.
In any case, the speed at which generations are becoming "sexual", if you will, seems to be younger and younger, and it can be disturbing at times. Young little girls should not be begging "can you get it up; are you big enough".
Rihanna is a no-talent hack. She's been staying relevant by relying more frequently on her sexuality, to the point where she might as well be singing, "Buy my album and I'll come to your house and have sex with you, promise!"
I agree with that, but you'll never rid music of misogyny by shunning artists when the whole of society accepts them. You can take the cough drop while you have the flu and it might help a symptom, but its not the solution.
And thats the thing, no one is addressing the actual issue here. Ashley Judd wants to sit there and make stupid comments about Snoop and P Diddy and instead she should be questioning our society. And instead people are trying to pretend as though this form of misogyny is some new level that we've reached and is something we haven't had present for a long ass time.
I find Judd's statement to be ing ridiculous, to be quite honest. But what is really sad is how prevalent the at ude is. Not one of you can quantify how rap is more misogynist than other genes but none the less that assumption is accepted as fact by many of you. This is not something that is vague and is EASILY studied. None of you may be racist and I don't believe you are, but I think it is pretty foolish to dismiss the effects of the perceptions of race has on the views of a genre of music predominantly made of of African Americans (I'm hoping that LNG and Spurm can understand the context of this statement because I know not everyone will).
When I'm not presented with proof to back up the statements of the level of misogyny in rap when I know that its a problem through out the entire music industry and has been for a long ass time then I have to wonder what pushes people to that position.
Let me put it to you this way: Study after Study after Study has shown that our society perceives African Americans far more negatively than other segments of society so I don't think its a wild leap to make the connection of why (or at the least allow for the possibility) a problem in all segments of the music world is perceived to be worse in a genre dominated by African Americans.
I can definitely see how it looks coming from Judd. I would argue that the misogny in most music comes from the fact that most rockers/rappers come from lower-income environments, and most of them express their newfound "power" in various ways, with misogyny being one of the most frequent.
There's lots of other factors in play too, such as education, social/peer pressure, etc etc.
But trying to rail against "misogyny" in our society isn't going to get one anywhere. You have to focus on something or else people won't listen, for good or for bad. That's why I welcome Judd saying that, because while it's tone-deaf, it might actually start an interesting discussion out there.
I think misogyny in rap is more accepted and forgiven, except by the Ashley Judds and the churchy soccer moms of the world, than misogyny in other mainstream genres.
I'm having a really hard time picturing Pitchfork.com, for example, naming a ROCK song with the same lyrics as "Big Pimpin" as the 30th best song of the decade, no matter how amazing the music and melody are. In fact, the rock artist who wrote such a song would likely be demoted to worse-than-Nickelback status by critics.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
