"Remember the Ladies..."

CanNotStay wrote:

I appreciate that we able to have this debate here. I just wanted to bring to light that this is not JayZs lyric. I think this is a critical piece of information to understand the song. There is no lyrics in the song that JayZ wrote that is misogynistic or references bitches. There is the line about the K-9 unit tho.

He's taking a lyric from a notoriously misogynistic song and changing it's meaning. It's no secret that misogyny is prevalent in hip hop and JayZ knew people were going to here the lyric and associate that, but upon further inspection realize that's not what he was referring to at all. It's ironic and I believe satirical to misogyny in rap.

Even if this song made you uncomfortable I hope it didn't ruin the show for you. This was just one of a few political statements weaved into the setlist in a more subtle way than usual. I believed it catered to the thematic concept of the show while, at the same time, celebrating our diversity.

I'm glad this thread has helped ease your disappointment. You have every right to still be disappointed though. People react differently to different things and are more sensitive to some words than others. I wouldn't consider myself to be a feminist but I don't appreciate when people are demeaning to woman. I had no problem with this collab. tho as I don't find it to be demeaning to woman at all. Contrarily I believe it to be a clever satire at the prevalent misogyny in hip hop.

CanNotStay wrote:

I appreciate that we able to have this debate here. I just wanted to bring to light that this is not JayZs lyric. I think this is a critical piece of information to understand the song. There is no lyrics in the song that JayZ wrote that is misogynistic or references bitches. There is the line about the K-9 unit tho.

He's taking a lyric from a notoriously misogynistic song and changing it's meaning. It's no secret that misogyny is prevalent in hip hop and JayZ knew people were going to here the lyric and associate that, but upon further inspection realize that's not what he was referring to at all. It's ironic and I believe satirical to misogyny in rap.

Even if this song made you uncomfortable I hope it didn't ruin the show for you. This was just one of a few political statements weaved into the setlist in a more subtle way than usual. I believed it catered to the thematic concept of the show while, at the same time, celebrating our diversity.

I'm glad this thread has helped ease your disappointment. You have every right to still be disappointed though. People react differently to different things and are more sensitive to some words than others. I wouldn't consider myself to be a feminist but I don't appreciate when people are demeaning to woman. I had no problem with this collab. tho as I don't find it to be demeaning to woman at all. Contrarily I believe it to be a clever satire at the prevalent misogyny in hip hop.

meme wrote:

SolarWorld wrote:

Ed called models "skinny little bitch"(es), he did so a long time ago. Was that ok with you Meme? Its ok for Ed to call models bitches but when Jay-Z says it as a play on words its the end of the world, I dont get it. Not to mention the other hip hop collaboration in which B-real talks about shooting people with Pearl Jam.

Does not compute.... :fp:

I have explained my reasoning on this in the first post.

fortyshades wrote:

I noticed that throughout this debate, you have a tendency to make arguments personal and try to do so in a very belitteling tone. ("Worrying" in previous mail, "*you* cant think for yourself", "you don't know what circular means" etc.)

I believe that your argument is circular because it goes a bit as followed: words are branded as derogatory, therefore you find it derogatory, and therefore - the reason why you find it derogatory - is because you can't think for yourself. So if I hypothetically make up a word that is derogatory (and think of the contradiction in this sentence!, for how do you make a word derogatory if you don't have a social and cultural model to do so?), and I tell you it is derogatory and you perceive it as such, well, that is because I told you so; hence conclusion: you can't think for yourself. "You worry about what other people think." If this is not circular, I do not know what is. Words are not isolated items; they are connected in a web of social and cultural meaning. Even the choice of "empowerment", as you state above, is always within a social context or movement.

You completly dismiss the social and cultural context in which words come to being or the histography of those words. Derogatory words are derogatory for a reason. They have a specific purpose and this purpose is not a complimenting one. So, for example, I have never met someone who thought that words like "kike" or "filthy Jew" are in any way or sense empowering. And stating: well, I think that "kike" is insulting, because I let other people think for me, is an outreagous one, to say the least.

Some derogatory words are now used (and please notice the nuance) as empowering, but this is not because (as you seem to claim) individuals decide so, but because there is a movement behind it. They take the derogatory word and use it in a different light as a "protest" - and you can't do that, if the word isn't derogatory to begin with! We see this for example, and let me emphasise this, within certain settings. In hiphop for example (which to a certain extent is a movement) the word "nigger" is not always used with the negative connotations attached to them. It is making a statement. It is taking the word back, so to speak and give it a different meaning. But in order to make this statement, in order to reverse the meaning, you have to take the histography of the word into account.

This is not about thinking for yourself (why do you individualize everything?) but because of the social and cultural context in which words are used. Even words that are empowered, are embedded in a collective movement, and are not individualized.

This empowering we now also see with words like "sluts" and "bitch" these days, but to state that Jay Z used the word "bitch" in his song - no matter which interpretation of his song you take - as "empowering" is in fact stretching it a bit. Stating, and I think that is what you mean in your posts, that the word "bitch" is insulting, well because you as a listener think it is insulting, because that is what has been said and taught to you, is because "you can't think for yourself" is dismissing the cultural, social meaning and histography of the word. Bitch is often used as an insult and not as a banner of feminity. No matter what, no matter which interpretation you take, (is he reffering to dogs, is it said in a conversation etc.) Jay Z is using this word on purpose and not because this word is cultural and social meaningless which you implictly claim.

Art / poetry has a specific place in this. It can take derogatory words, place them in a specific storyline and actually criticize the social and cultural meaning and histography of this word - which I think Jay Z is doing. This is not to say, that the "listener" can't think for him- or herself. But rather that context, and not the word, gives the word a specific meaning. The listerner should therefore place it in the context. But lets be honest here, the song of Jay-Z is an ambigious one.

Now, you may use my last statement and see it as evidence of your point. But this is simplyfying the matter. It is not (only) the listener that decide - the artist, the context, the genre, the movement all play a part in this. So, it is not that the listener "can't think for him- or herself" asn you previously claimed; this trail of thought and argument is individualizing words and devoiding them of social meaning. It is the context that gives the word meaning. This is something else than you have stated in previous posts. You (and now it is my turn to be personal) have the tendency to simplify complex matters and place them in a raster of personal decision. Choices are rarely personal or individualized; we are all connected within a social web of meaning and our actions, thoughts and yes, even words, are rarely devoid of cultural or social context.

MG79478 wrote:

Look at what YOU have turned this discussion in to; this doesn’t even resemble the original discussion. I hope you are happy.

You wouldn’t feel belittled if you weren’t wrong. I love how you go to “I’m a university a teacher” so often, like that means something. Is wikipedia considered a good reference at your university? Those who can do, those who can’t teach…. I’m not impressed.

If I was going to learn yet another language, why on earth would I pick an obscure language like Dutch? I’d pick a language used in a country where I do business. Why would you even try to make such a silly argument?

Thanks for the reminder on the last thread; I should have realized by your posting style that we had tangled before. Your level of closed mindedness is unparalleled on this board. I’ve never met anyone who just ignores what others posts, and repeatedly posts their own opinions over and over as much as you. You should be ashamed to actually be a European with so little grasp on history. So I gotta ask, are you just at troll? You remembered me, you post such nonsense, you can’t be for real? You just waited for me to find time to post, and pounced?

One word of advice, listen to other people, really listen, maybe even read a history book. You might just learn something. In the last case, it was a complete misunderstanding of history. In this case, it’s a lesson my small children understand. (Sticks and Stones!) It’s quite evident that you just like to hear yourself talk (type in this case), you spout what you think is intelligent sounding words, and run you get torn to shreds. I for one and glad you ran, and hope you are a man of your word, because all you do is waste everyone’s time.