The Rolling Stones Thread

vant0037

Livestreaming the Nashville show tonight.  They sound good!

vant0037

First Connection since 06!

static111

Everyday as 11/20 nears my anticipation grows a little more.  Can't wait to see the stones in Austin!

mrussel1

vant0037 said:

Livestreaming the Nashville show tonight.  They sound good!

Was it on You Tube or just audio stream?

vant0037

mrussel1 said:

vant0037 said:

Livestreaming the Nashville show tonight.  They sound good!

Was it on You Tube or just audio stream?

IORR usually lists links to Facebook people who are live-streaming.

ultrapig

Black Pumas announced as the opener for Minneapolis. I saw them in Omaha a few months ago and they were awesome!

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Gonna party with 2 dear friends in Minneapolis next Sunday. 
FUCK YEAH!!!

THE SUNSHINE BORES THE DAYLIGHTS OUT OF ME!!!!!!

mfc2006

ultrapig said:

Black Pumas announced as the opener for Minneapolis. I saw them in Omaha a few months ago and they were awesome!

They are so great live. We saw them at Ohana and they killed it.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Once upon a time you dressed so fine
Threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn't you?

Im gonna party like Keith Fucking Richards!!!

mfc2006

SPEEDY MCCREADY said:

Once upon a time you dressed so fine
Threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn't you?

Im gonna party like Keith Fucking Richards!!!

You should!!! Wish I could go to that show.

JH6056

Has the fact that the Stones are FINALLY showing a little bit of awareness about how truly horrible the premise of Brown Sugar's lyrics are is happening?

No doubt, that song has one of the most killer hooks and great music of any rock song recorded.  But it's still about - literally, lyrics are literally about - how raping slave girls is sexy and speaks to sexiness of Black women.

I feel this is overdue, and in general I love Keith Richards for being, well, fucking Keith Richards.  But COME ON Keith, it is SO BAD that you're trying to sell the idea now that the song was "always about the horrors of slavery".  The song is 50 yrs old now.  There are 48 yrs of public statements by the Stones about how the song is "a celebration of black women". So don't even try it, no, the lyrics are "Cold English blood runs hot/Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop/Sly old slaver knows he's doing alright/Hear him whip the women just around midnight.... Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just like a young girl/black girl should"

No, no one except those trying to share in the denial believes you meant it as a critique or historical song.

But here's the article, and sorry if it's already been discussed, it's a lot of pages here

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/576521-rolling-stones-self-censoring-one-of-their-most

helplessdancer

i am a big fan of how humans have evolved, and sometimes, along the twisted journey we have even learned to be better persons. i have gone through the same personal journey of evolving as a human. i still love keith and mick. nothing has changed for me.

vant0037

JH6056 said:

Has the fact that the Stones are FINALLY showing a little bit of awareness about how truly horrible the premise of Brown Sugar's lyrics are is happening?

No doubt, that song has one of the most killer hooks and great music of any rock song recorded.  But it's still about - literally, lyrics are literally about - how raping slave girls is sexy and speaks to sexiness of Black women.

I feel this is overdue, and in general I love Keith Richards for being, well, fucking Keith Richards.  But COME ON Keith, it is SO BAD that you're trying to sell the idea now that the song was "always about the horrors of slavery".  The song is 50 yrs old now.  There are 48 yrs of public statements by the Stones about how the song is "a celebration of black women". So don't even try it, no, the lyrics are "Cold English blood runs hot/Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop/Sly old slaver knows he's doing alright/Hear him whip the women just around midnight.... Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just like a young girl/black girl should"

No, no one except those trying to share in the denial believes you meant it as a critique or historical song.

But here's the article, and sorry if it's already been discussed, it's a lot of pages here

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/576521-rolling-stones-self-censoring-one-of-their-most

While I don’t think I believe it was always intended as a “historical critique,” I also don’t believe that it was ever intended as an endorsement of a slave owner taking advantage of subjugated humans.  It was Mick, in his ever hyper sexuality, writing about sex.  That doesn’t make it OK, but it also doesn’t make it a pro-slavery song.  And let’s not forget, they voluntarily stopped playing it, meaning they recognize the issue with it.  The problem with so-called cancel culture is, while it’s certainly just fine in a market-driven world to decide what’s of value and not - meaning, if you produce a product or performance that the market doesn’t support, like sexist or racist ideas, the market won’t support you, cancel culture also doesn’t allow for growth, remorse, or apology.  Black-listed once and you’re done.  Say what you want about the song, but they’ve censored themselves here, out of apparent respect for how the song might be heard today post-#MeToo/BLM.

I’ve long said we should stop looking for our heroes in people who are paid to entertain.  I certainly am not looking for white men approaching the age of 80 to pave the way on social justice issues, not now and not then.

Loujoe

Seriously disturbing stuff in other songs too. It's only rock and roll. Another time and place. Was/is it ok. No. It brings awareness yes and I think mick can sing about a slaughterhouse and make it sound hot. I like a song to be a bit shocking from time to time. Endorsing violence, sexual predation is gross. Should it be deleted from r n r history. Nope imo.

Gern Blansten

JH6056 said:

Has the fact that the Stones are FINALLY showing a little bit of awareness about how truly horrible the premise of Brown Sugar's lyrics are is happening?

No doubt, that song has one of the most killer hooks and great music of any rock song recorded.  But it's still about - literally, lyrics are literally about - how raping slave girls is sexy and speaks to sexiness of Black women.

I feel this is overdue, and in general I love Keith Richards for being, well, fucking Keith Richards.  But COME ON Keith, it is SO BAD that you're trying to sell the idea now that the song was "always about the horrors of slavery".  The song is 50 yrs old now.  There are 48 yrs of public statements by the Stones about how the song is "a celebration of black women". So don't even try it, no, the lyrics are "Cold English blood runs hot/Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop/Sly old slaver knows he's doing alright/Hear him whip the women just around midnight.... Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just like a young girl/black girl should"

No, no one except those trying to share in the denial believes you meant it as a critique or historical song.

But here's the article, and sorry if it's already been discussed, it's a lot of pages here

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/576521-rolling-stones-self-censoring-one-of-their-most

I hate to admit that I never knew what the lyrics referred to. Had no fucking idea and I've heard that song a million times.

mrussel1

Loujoe said:

Seriously disturbing stuff in other songs too. It's only rock and roll. Another time and place. Was/is it ok. No. It brings awareness yes and I think mick can sing about a slaughterhouse and make it sound hot. I like a song to be a bit shocking from time to time. Endorsing violence, sexual predation is gross. Should it be deleted from r n r history. Nope imo.

Just read the lyrics to Stray Cat Blues...great song btw, but highly inappropriate!  

mrussel1

And playing it this century, he changes it to "16 years old".. Probably got some legal advice.  Still creepy to see them in their late 50's singing it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVZH7IdHP2E

Loujoe

mrussel1 said:

Loujoe said:

Seriously disturbing stuff in other songs too. It's only rock and roll. Another time and place. Was/is it ok. No. It brings awareness yes and I think mick can sing about a slaughterhouse and make it sound hot. I like a song to be a bit shocking from time to time. Endorsing violence, sexual predation is gross. Should it be deleted from r n r history. Nope imo.

Just read the lyrics to Stray Cat Blues...great song btw, but highly inappropriate!  

That's the one I was thinking of. Had that cd on the other day.

JH6056

vant0037 said:

JH6056 said:

Has the fact that the Stones are FINALLY showing a little bit of awareness about how truly horrible the premise of Brown Sugar's lyrics are is happening?

No doubt, that song has one of the most killer hooks and great music of any rock song recorded.  But it's still about - literally, lyrics are literally about - how raping slave girls is sexy and speaks to sexiness of Black women.

I feel this is overdue, and in general I love Keith Richards for being, well, fucking Keith Richards.  But COME ON Keith, it is SO BAD that you're trying to sell the idea now that the song was "always about the horrors of slavery".  The song is 50 yrs old now.  There are 48 yrs of public statements by the Stones about how the song is "a celebration of black women". So don't even try it, no, the lyrics are "Cold English blood runs hot/Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop/Sly old slaver knows he's doing alright/Hear him whip the women just around midnight.... Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just like a young girl/black girl should"

No, no one except those trying to share in the denial believes you meant it as a critique or historical song.

But here's the article, and sorry if it's already been discussed, it's a lot of pages here

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/576521-rolling-stones-self-censoring-one-of-their-most

While I don’t think I believe it was always intended as a “historical critique,” I also don’t believe that it was ever intended as an endorsement of a slave owner taking advantage of subjugated humans.  It was Mick, in his ever hyper sexuality, writing about sex.  That doesn’t make it OK, but it also doesn’t make it a pro-slavery song.  And let’s not forget, they voluntarily stopped playing it, meaning they recognize the issue with it.  The problem with so-called cancel culture is, while it’s certainly just fine in a market-driven world to decide what’s of value and not - meaning, if you produce a product or performance that the market doesn’t support, like sexist or racist ideas, the market won’t support you, cancel culture also doesn’t allow for growth, remorse, or apology.  Black-listed once and you’re done.  Say what you want about the song, but they’ve censored themselves here, out of apparent respect for how the song might be heard today post-#MeToo/BLM.

I’ve long said we should stop looking for our heroes in people who are paid to entertain.  I certainly am not looking for white men approaching the age of 80 to pave the way on social justice issues, not now and not then.

I hear your point. But the truth about what really gets in people's craws about supposed "cancel culture" is, it actually demands responsibility for real things.

First on their apology, please be clear: I'm very glad they're removing the song, and I appreciate an apology, no matter that they're doing this after singing it and enjoy the rewards of the song for 49 yrs.  But since they are touring right now, I am glad they removed it.

What I call bullshit on is Keith's statement that it was always meant to be a historical commentary on the horrors of slavery.  To try so lame-ly to "justify" it now, this way, is absolutely adding insult to injury, and frankly it means he's not taking an ounce of responsibility for it.  So yeah, I am glad they won't be singing it, but that sure is not an apology, and really it sounds like Keith thinks those who found it problematic are dumb enough to believe it was always a historic song about the horrors, not a celebration of the joys of sex with black girls. Which, have we covered it yet? is exaclty what the lyrics say.

On the "views of slavery" the song represents, you can say it's not a pro-slavery song all day.  But you can never say with a straight face that it is not a pro-sex with slave girls song, which = rape, which is why it's so incredibly problematic.  Let me refresh your memory about the lyrics, which couldn't be any clearer in their description of a girl being sold and all that follows and literally identifying with slavers and why they were so, what, full of lust for their slave girls? So wanting to have sex with them after they bought them? Maybe they aren't writing a treatise on all the reasons slavery was great, but read these lyrics and then explain to me how the 1st 2 verses are NOT a CELEBRATION of having sex with slave girls. Since literally... it's exactly what the song is about. Then explain how Mick then goes on to say of the black woman currently in his sights in the song must be the daughter of a "tent show queen", which 

Gold Coast slave ship bound for cotton fields
Sold in the market down in New Orleans
Scarred old slaver know he's doin' all right
Hear him whip the women just around midnight

Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good

Brown Sugar, just like a young girl should

Drums beatin' cold, English blood runs hot
Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop
House boy knows that he's doin' all right
You should have heard him just around midnight

Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good?

Brown Sugar, just like a black girl should

I bet your mama was a tent show queen
And all her boyfriends were sweet 16
I'm no school boy but I know what I like
You should have heard them just around midnight

Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good
Brown Sugar, just like a young girl should

I said, yeah, yeah, yeah, wooo!
How come you, how come you dance so good
Yeah, yeah, yeah, wooo!
Just like a, just like a black girl should
Yeah, yeah, yeah, wooo!

_________________________________________________

And in the 3rd verse Mick brings it current, brings it back to him, CONTINUING singing about having sex with black women who are not volunteering for that sex.  He talks about "I bet your mama was a tent show queen" where a "tent show queen" who in the South (where he was when he wrote the song and drew so much of the imagery) tent shows were theater but women who performed in them were often forced to have other relations for money as they moved around, so basically again NOT a voluntary sexual relationship.

So unless you are going to pretend the lyrics are somehow not relevant to interpreting where Mick was coming from in writing the song, please explain how especially the 1st 2 versese of the song are NOT a celebration of having sex with black slave girls?  Not a "Yeah, this is the scene, you know it, you should have heard them just around midnight, brown sugar, how come you taste so good? Brown sugar, just like a young girl/black girl should" is not a joyful rousing song about this topic?

JH6056

Gern Blansten said:

JH6056 said:

Has the fact that the Stones are FINALLY showing a little bit of awareness about how truly horrible the premise of Brown Sugar's lyrics are is happening?

No doubt, that song has one of the most killer hooks and great music of any rock song recorded.  But it's still about - literally, lyrics are literally about - how raping slave girls is sexy and speaks to sexiness of Black women.

I feel this is overdue, and in general I love Keith Richards for being, well, fucking Keith Richards.  But COME ON Keith, it is SO BAD that you're trying to sell the idea now that the song was "always about the horrors of slavery".  The song is 50 yrs old now.  There are 48 yrs of public statements by the Stones about how the song is "a celebration of black women". So don't even try it, no, the lyrics are "Cold English blood runs hot/Lady of the house wonderin' when it's gonna stop/Sly old slaver knows he's doing alright/Hear him whip the women just around midnight.... Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just like a young girl/black girl should"

No, no one except those trying to share in the denial believes you meant it as a critique or historical song.

But here's the article, and sorry if it's already been discussed, it's a lot of pages here

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/576521-rolling-stones-self-censoring-one-of-their-most

I hate to admit that I never knew what the lyrics referred to. Had no fucking idea and I've heard that song a million times.

I grew up singing it, I knew a lot of the words, definitely the beginning of the 1st verse. Shows how when it's familiar before you really understand it, you can absorb the "yahoo" part of it so easily, I sang that song with JOY when I saw the Stones at 13 yrs old. It was 10 yrs later I actually heard the words I was singing along with on the radio and LISTENED. And realized what the song actually said in it's words, plainly, with zero mystery. And was absolutely horrified.