No, people have been saying this for years.
Nobody does this. Nobody goes out of their way to find things offensive or sets out with a goal to do so, they either find things offensive for reasons or they do not, and in this case the reasons are fairly well documented and understood.
For the record, CBC is not claiming that it's about rape. They even acknowledge that there are two interpretations. Ultimately they are simply choosing not to play the song, believing it is inappropriate.
She's asking for a comb to fix her hair because she wants to go home appearing proper and not raise any questions. We don't know if this is because a) she's just paranoid, b) they've been kissing, c) they've been fooling around, d) they've been fucking.
????
Maybe it's hard for you to believe this but it happens everyday.
"Those statues of Confederates were put up in the 1910s! In the context they were erected in, they were perfectly fine, why are people ignoring that part of history? People are just looking for something to be upset with."
Not to de-raill but, there is no context in any point post the Civil War that putting up statues of what are essentially Traitors who wanted to own slaves is ever something that should be "fine", context included. Then again maybe that's your point as I've missed some of the context of the convo.
Agreed, context is important, but the other aspect of this context is that "I'm not allowed to say yes" and "I'm not interested" look similar from an external perspective, which leaves it up to the male counterpart to determine the difference.
Give me a verified example of someone on record saying "I am going to go out of my way to find something to be offended about because I desire to feel offended".
she says no because, no matter how much she wanted to, it was WILDLY inappropriate in social norms for her to stay.
I mean sure but half of the lyrics can be seen as semi rapey so I can kinda understand why a station wouldn't wanna have this song.
There is, but the reason they do it is because of beliefs they hold, not just because they desire to feel offended.
Underrated post.
You showed me an example of someone ascribing something to their past actions in retrospect, not their reasoning for doing what they did. That you are so quick to duck any further conversation shows you have no interest in discussing the issue in good faith.
How did I miss this post?It's spot on.
LMAO.Take the L and carry on ;).
I mean this is an entirely baseless assumption to prove a toxic point...... "let's assume the worst possible intent and motives of one side to make a point" is pretty shitty... especially where we're discussing a work of art and not say a legal case...
This is the equivalent of entering a Star Wars discussion just to drop an RLM review as to avoid using your own words.
I dunno why people keep saying they banned the song. A radio station choosing to remove a song from their Christmas playlist is not a ban lol
Intention doesn't matter, because in historical context, this was the norm. It wasn't considered bad form to pressure a woman to forego her own desires or concerns to get what you want. You can't deny that to be true. Nor can you deny that women were equally shamed for asserting their wants and needs to men.
What?No.He asked for a specific thing and I provided that specific thing.Your analogy doesn't make any sense.Try again.
Ok, original point still stands. Are you for removing all misogynistic hip hop songs from radio stations?
except that in the context of the song, her desires and concerns are two separate things. That's the part being glossed over. "I want to stay. It's not proper. what to do what to do. no I really shouldn't. ok maybe for a bit longer. ok I have to go. ok maybe I'll stay a bit longer yet." etc.
That isn't the point of the thread, and we've had that thread numerous times. It never goes anywhere because like what you're doing it becomes "well what about this?"
What is the reason you bring this up?
Pretty sure Surfinn is not in charge of Canadian radio stations, first off.
The dude just gave you a critique of why he thinks the content of your video is not up to snuff as a response, especially considering it's not necessarily direct evidence but more of a secondary source discussing his experiences through their lens and biases.
The discussion was never about this. This thread is about suggestive and questionable pieces of writing (whether intended or not) in regard to a woman being manipulated or pressured into doing a sexual act against her will. About a guy continuing to pursue her after she gave a hard no. Point me to any rap or hip hop songs that cross the same line and we can have a separate discussion about it.
It's him appealing to her desires with disregard to her very genuine and real concerns with excuses that may only give her a 50/50 chance of dodging the consequences.
