Who, What, When, Where?!: Miscellaneous Celebrity News 2.0

[bobalina]

6 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

I don't think Shatner has an ego problem. He has a persona that might be construed by some as ego but he is to me a straight shooter who is living life to the fullest. 

I was looking for an article about him and came across this from his facebook group page and saw his pinned announcement at the top 

 https://www.facebook.com/groups/272733319504206/  

From that note he doesn't come across as wanting to have his ego propped up. 

 

 

Plus also, I want this to happen now. The Queen has mourned long enough over Phillip... time to have the time of her life with Shatner. And now I have two song loops in my head...

I seriously wish this would happen. 

 

The Queen Can do better than Shatner, Mel Brooks is still around.

And if you had ever heard him scream at convention staff because he didn't get something he didn't ask for you'd see his ego differently. A b d this was before the movies when he was just a so-so actor.

[Popples]

 

[aradia22]

RE: Katey Sagal

How dare they! Also, it was the middle of the afternoon. LOOK when you are making a turn. 

Quote

We're told the driver of the car did stop to help Katey, and she was transported by ambulance to a local hospital and treated for her injuries. Our source says they're not serious though, and she's expected to be released sometime Friday.

At least it wasn't a hit and run and she seems to be alright. 

[aradia22]

Quote

While the legendary actor made waves Friday when an interview surfaced in which he said the recently released comedy-drama “Best Sellers” would be his last film, TheWrap has confirmed with Caine’s representatives that he is not fully retiring.

https://www.thewrap.com/michael-caine-not-retiring/

[Leeds]

On 10/14/2021 at 11:19 AM, Wiendish Fitch said:

For all the whining about "cancel culture", I'm AMAZED that radio stations still play "Brown Sugar". I mean, we can more or less successfully discourage "Baby It's Cold Outside"*, but we're willing to shrug off "Brown Sugar"?!

 

*Not that this bothers me, because I loathe "Baby It's Cold Outside", but I actually think "Brown Sugar" is a few notches above it in terms of sheer repugnance. 

 

On 10/14/2021 at 3:29 PM, GaT said:

I've been reading comments in a few places & listening to people on gossip type shows, & apparently quite a lot of people had no idea what the lyrics were to "Brown Sugar". I don't feel so alone now, but holy hell, what does it say about music when a song can be as popular as "Brown Sugar" with so many people not having any idea what the lyrics are? For years?

I'm not defending Brown Sugar, but top selling misogynistic rap songs that include the following lines are way worse and way beyond abhorrent. 

 

1) "So we could never be a couple hun / F*ck love / All I got for hoes is hard d*ck and bubblegum." - Big L

2) "Bitches ain't sh*t but hoes and tricks / Lick on these nuts and suck the d*ck." - Snoop Dogg

3) "Once again I gotta punch a bitch in her sh*t / I'm icy bitch, don't look at my wrist / Because if you do, I might blind you bitch." - Jasper Dolphin of Odd Future

4) "I know she like chocolate men / She got more n*ggas off than Cochran." - Kanye West

5) "You ain't no better because you don't be f*cking rappers / You only f*ck with actors / You're still getting f*cked backwards" - Jay Z

6) "My little sister's birthday / She'll remember me / For a gift I had ten of my boys take her virginity." - Bizarre

7) "You know me I smoke a blunt while I'm getting brain / Stick my finger in her butt while I'm getting brain / Yeah I'm nasty bitch / What? / Lil Wayne." - Lil Wayne

8) "I gotta say it; I'm the president, I run things / All these hoes tryna save a n*gga c*m stains." - Lil Wayne.

9) "Slut, you think I won't choke no whore / Til the vocal cords don't work in her throat no more?!" - Eminem

10) "Is Big L slow? / Hell no! / Bitches get f*cked on the roof when I ain't got no hotel dough." - Big L

11) "My d*ck hard as a motherf*cker / You don't what? / Tell that sh*t to another sucker." - Cam'ron

12) "Baby girl pull your pants up, I only want your face." - Fredo Santana

13) "You ain't gonna let me f*ck you and I feel you / But you gone suck my d*ck, or I'll kill you." - Chief Keef

14) "It's damn near four in the morning, ain't sh*t to discuss / Til you ask which d*ck do you suck." - Jadakiss

15) "Love a feminist b*tch, oh, it get my dick hard / So no apologies for all the misogyny." - Danny Brown

 

[Enigma X]

I don't listen to those songs either.

I thought this topic came up because it was mentioned in the news that the Rolling Stones, themselves, decided to retire their song.

If other artists with songs that have poor optics (to say the least) choose to retire those songs, I think they may also be commented on here too.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Enigma X

[SusanM]

I could be wrong  but I think another big difference is, frankly, most of the artists listed by @Leeds are rappers and the problematic (to say the least) lyrics are part of what they sell,  Those songs are not getting played on the radio - or certainly not on stations aimed at Mom, Dad and the kiddies.  A song like Brown Sugar on the other hand gets a lot of airplay, especially, let's face it, on golden oldies stations.  That said an awful lot of mainstream rock songs don't bear close scrutiny - misogyny thy name is rock.

[Leeds]

25 minutes ago, SusannahM said:

I could be wrong  but I think another big difference is, frankly, most of the artists listed by @Leeds are rappers and the problematic (to say the least) lyrics are part of what they sell,  Those songs are not getting played on the radio - or certainly not on stations aimed at Mom, Dad and the kiddies.  A song like Brown Sugar on the other hand gets a lot of airplay, especially, let's face it, on golden oldies stations.  That said an awful lot of mainstream rock songs don't bear close scrutiny - misogyny thy name is rock.

I don't disagree at all about the "problematic . . . lyrics are part of what they sell."  But that doesn't make it okay and I find it hard to believe that these songs aren't heard across the wide spectrum of however "kids today" (sorry) listen to stuff.  Not many are tuned into NPR - or other "stations aimed at Mom, Dad and the kiddies" all day long.

[SusanM]

1 minute ago, Leeds said:

But that doesn't make it okay and I find it hard to believe that these songs aren't heard across the wide spectrum of however "kids today" (sorry) listen to stuff. 

Absolutely agree.  Back in the olden days of CDs with parental warnings parents at least had some control and awareness of what their kids were listening to (or at least what they were buying for their kids anyway) now I've no idea how parents monitor this - if it's even possible anymore really.

[annzeepark914]

2 hours ago, Leeds said:

 

I'm not defending Brown Sugar, but top selling misogynistic rap songs that include the following lines are way worse and way beyond abhorrent. 

 

1) "So we could never be a couple hun / F*ck love / All I got for hoes is hard d*ck and bubblegum." - Big L

2) "Bitches ain't sh*t but hoes and tricks / Lick on these nuts and suck the d*ck." - Snoop Dogg

3) "Once again I gotta punch a bitch in her sh*t / I'm icy bitch, don't look at my wrist / Because if you do, I might blind you bitch." - Jasper Dolphin of Odd Future

4) "I know she like chocolate men / She got more n*ggas off than Cochran." - Kanye West

5) "You ain't no better because you don't be f*cking rappers / You only f*ck with actors / You're still getting f*cked backwards" - Jay Z

6) "My little sister's birthday / She'll remember me / For a gift I had ten of my boys take her virginity." - Bizarre

7) "You know me I smoke a blunt while I'm getting brain / Stick my finger in her butt while I'm getting brain / Yeah I'm nasty bitch / What? / Lil Wayne." - Lil Wayne

8) "I gotta say it; I'm the president, I run things / All these hoes tryna save a n*gga c*m stains." - Lil Wayne.

9) "Slut, you think I won't choke no whore / Til the vocal cords don't work in her throat no more?!" - Eminem

10) "Is Big L slow? / Hell no! / Bitches get f*cked on the roof when I ain't got no hotel dough." - Big L

11) "My d*ck hard as a motherf*cker / You don't what? / Tell that sh*t to another sucker." - Cam'ron

12) "Baby girl pull your pants up, I only want your face." - Fredo Santana

13) "You ain't gonna let me f*ck you and I feel you / But you gone suck my d*ck, or I'll kill you." - Chief Keef

14) "It's damn near four in the morning, ain't sh*t to discuss / Til you ask which d*ck do you suck." - Jadakiss

15) "Love a feminist b*tch, oh, it get my dick hard / So no apologies for all the misogyny." - Danny Brown

 

What a bunch of charmers these creeps are.  And to think Tipper Gore was vilified back in the 90's for complaining about filthy lyrics in rock songs. These rap lyrics are beyond filth...they're scatological.  I can't believe record companies produce them.

Edited October 16, 2021 by annzeepark914

[aradia22]

Quote

A song like Brown Sugar on the other hand gets a lot of airplay, especially, let's face it, on golden oldies stations. 

Me, quietly sitting out this whole conversation because I don't think I've even heard the title of this song in my entire life until this thread.

[Enigma X]

I just want to put it out there that I am firmly against parental advisory labels. I will not endorse that.

[Annber03]

2 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I just want to put it out there that I am firmly against parental advisory labels. I will not endorse that.

I remember hearing about some musician saying once, in response to the parental advisory labels, "Yeah, go ahead and slap one on my album! I'll sell millions!" And they were right. Those are like a beacon to people who want to be rebellious and check out something deemed "forbidden".

My parents never restricted what my sister and I listened to, and didn't support the advisory labels or the PMRC stuff, either. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

2 hours ago, Enigma X said:

I don't listen to those songs either.

I thought this topic came up because it was mentioned in the news that the Rolling Stones, themselves, decided to retire their song.

If other artists with songs that have poor optics (to say the least) choose to retire those songs, I think they may also be commented on here too.

That's kinda the point, though, yeah? I've been trying to not insert myself into this discussion, and yet.

The song Brown Sugar is almost as old as I am, since it was released in 1971. For over fifty years, no one had any idea what the lyrics meant or even were in some cases, due to Mick Jagger's lack of enunciating. Did no one think to look, and if not, what are we mad at now? That the Stones "got away" with singing about slavery for half a century, or that we didn't get to shame them into retiring the song? Why would Richards and Jagger choose not to just put the song to bed quietly? Why would Richards and Jagger choose to actually say,"Yeah, we were singing about selling people in New Orleans?" If they hadn't said anything, would anyone have known or cared? No one cared enough to even check before. This whole thing is kind of weird.

[Blergh]

OK, just because the above-mentioned more recent rappers'. . . ditties seem cruder and more demeaning than the Rolling Stones' now-retired. .. number doesn't mean that the older song is polite or edifying for potential listeners of all backgrounds. Being 'not as bad' is never the same as being good. 

 

While I am against outright bans and censorship, I'm not against parental advisory labels per se even with the knowledge that X can mark the spot for those seeking out the most salacious materials. 

However, what I am FOR   is for parents and guardians of minors to  carefully  listen to whatever lyrics of songs, read whatever texts,  and watch whatever TV shows, movies, streams,etc. the minors may be interested in and/or watching. ..and have calm  give-and-take discussions with the minors about the meanings and themes of lyrics, words, images,etc. (e.g. 'Do you think he's being respectful to the woman he's addressing and what do you think a valid response would be on her part?' ) Anything that would encourage potential consumers of all  ages to carefully consider weighing the pros and cons of figuratively or literally buying anything before actually obtaining any of the above commodities would be positive steps. 

 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Blergh

[Leeds]

14 hours ago, Enigma X said:

I just want to put it out there that I am firmly against parental advisory labels. I will not endorse that.

I have no problem with parental advisory labels.  I just think they're meaningless and worthless since I don't think anything will stop a resourceful child from accessing anything they want, from ugly twitter comments to the most disturbing porn imaginable.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Leeds
Added comma for clarity

[GaT]

2 hours ago, SusannahM said:

Back in the olden days of CDs with parental warnings parents at least had some control and awareness of what their kids were listening to

Brown Sugar was released in 1971, MP3 players didn't start to sell until the late 90s. That's at least 20 years of warning labels & still people (myself included) had no idea what the song was about or what the lyrics were. It doesn't sound like parents had much awareness even with warning labels.

47 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Why would Richards and Jagger choose to actually say,"Yeah, we were singing about selling people in New Orleans?" If they hadn't said anything, would anyone have known or cared? No one cared enough to even check before. This whole thing is kind of weird.

The Los Angeles Times  (behind a paywall, use an incognito window if you want to read it) did an interview with them & noticed the song was gone from the playlist & asked why.

Quote

One song the band seems to have dropped from its set since the tour started up again is “Brown Sugar,” the Stones’ gleefully problematic early-’70s smash that opens on a “Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields.”

“You picked up on that, huh?” Richards said when asked why they’re not playing the tune. “I don’t know. I’m trying to figure out with the sisters quite where the beef is. Didn’t they understand this was a song about the horrors of slavery? But they’re trying to bury it. At the moment I don’t want to get into conflicts with all of this s—.” He laughed in his signature raspy fashion. “But I’m hoping that we’ll be able to resurrect the babe in her glory somewhere along the track.”

Jagger, as usual, was more circumspect than his freewheeling counterpart. “We’ve played ‘Brown Sugar’ every night since 1970, so sometimes you think, We’ll take that one out for now and see how it goes,” he said. “We might put it back in.” 

 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

10 minutes ago, GaT said:

The Los Angeles Times  (behind a paywall, use an incognito window if you want to read it) did an interview with them & noticed the song was gone from the playlist & asked why.

Huh. That article is from a little more than a week ago, so this kind of underlines my point about no one caring enough before to raise a stink. Because this is the first I've heard of them either dropping the song or them being asked about the lyrics. Given today's modern sensibilities, I feel like I would have noticed, particularly with R. Kelly's recent conviction for being an all-around nasty-ass.

[GaT]

25 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

this kind of underlines my point about no one caring enough before to raise a stink.

Or, they literally had no idea what the lyrics were. If someone had asked me what I thought "Brown Sugar" was about before this all became public I would have said it was about some white guy having the hots for a black woman. I've seen that in a few places. 

[cynicat]

20 hours ago, Katy M said:

 Nobody owes you public mourning.  We don't actually even know these people.  In most cases they aren't missed as people (by the fans, not their family) but by their work output.

I bolded that last sentence because while I agree with you, it would be massively hypocritical of me to say we should judge them by their work output and then subscribe to a forum where all we do is judge their lives and actions (in a snarky way) 24/7.  

Your post reminds me that I shouldn't contribute to putting them under a microscope.  Am I going to unsubscribe?  Hell no, but I do feel a little dirty.

[Kel Varnsen]

What is interesting about Brown Sugar is that it is a song about a terrible situation told from the point of view of a terrible person. If you took that same subject and made it into a movie it would probably be an Oscar contender. I mean it's the Stones choice to play whatever songs they want of course. But I am also reminded of the song Money for Nothing by Dire Straights, and how it was banned from Canadian radio for awhile because of some anti-gay lines in the song. But the song is a story told from the point of view of an appliance delivery guy who is jealous of the success of rock stars and is insulting them. So should songs that tell stories only tell stories about good people? Movies, TV shows and books aren't held to that same standard? If they were i wouldn't have just finished a rewatch of The Sopranos.

[DrSpaceman73]

51 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

What is interesting about Brown Sugar is that it is a song about a terrible situation told from the point of view of a terrible person. If you took that same subject and made it into a movie it would probably be an Oscar contender. I mean it's the Stones choice to play whatever songs they want of course. But I am also reminded of the song Money for Nothing by Dire Straights, and how it was banned from Canadian radio for awhile because of some anti-gay lines in the song. But the song is a story told from the point of view of an appliance delivery guy who is jealous of the success of rock stars and is insulting them. So should songs that tell stories only tell stories about good people? Movies, TV shows and books aren't held to that same standard? If they were i wouldn't have just finished a rewatch of The Sopranos.

Yes it's the whole idea of songs and where you draw the line of censoring songs for messaging. 

Don't stand so close to me is about a teacher student attraction.  I'll be watching you is a stalker song.  Many others. The whole thing about baby it's cold outside and the meaning.  Is Lola acceptable now or is it anti-trans? 

Personally I'm anti censorship in almost all cases. If we only allow songs (movies, tv shows, books, etc) about 'acceptable' topics then art will be pretty bland and boring. 

If the Stones don't want to do that song, that I understand. I too never knew it was about slavery. 

Something like money for nothin I would think you could bleep out the controversial word, it's a small part of the song.  In fact I thought many places already did that. That doesn't detract from the overall message or change it to a significant degree.  I think other songs do this too.  

But outright banning I think should only be only in the most extreme circumstances and should be rarely, if ever, done.just because some people are offended or don't agree with a song message, sorry, that doesn't mean no one else can hear it. 

Edited October 16, 2021 by DrSpaceman73

[SusanM]

10 hours ago, Annber03 said:

My parents never restricted what my sister and I listened to, and didn't support the advisory labels or the PMRC stuff, either. 

I like the warnings on computer games and the like.  As someone who has zero interest in these I appreciated knowing what was age appropriate for my kids. 

[Kel Varnsen]

16 minutes ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

If the Stones don't want to do that song, that I understand. I too never knew it was about slavery. 

The only reason I knew what it was about was because of that awesome scene in The Wire season 1 where one of the detectives shows how he would be good at listening to tapped phones and understanding the slang being used because when he was a kid he listened to Brown Sugar on repeat until he figured out what the lyrics were.

[Katy M]

10 hours ago, Leeds said:

I have no problem with parental advisory labels.  I just think they're meaningless and worthless since I don't think anything will stop a resourceful child from accessing anything they want from ugly twitter comments to the most disturbing porn imaginable.

Yeah, I think they mainly just serve the same purpose as an ingredient list on food.  those who care will note and use the info.  Those that don't won't.  They certainly aren't inherently evil.  I am also against censorship.  And I don't think my parents monitored my listening or what I watched on tv at all. I grew up on soaps.  Probably why I'm still single.  I got a warped view of all things relationship:)

[Cobalt Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

 Movies, TV shows and books aren't held to that same standard? If they were i wouldn't have just finished a rewatch of The Sopranos.

Kind of? At least in the case of books. A year or so ago, Laura Ingalls Wilder's name was taken off of an obscure award for literature because of the way she described Native Americans in one of her books. Never mind that the wording was actually changed at some point during the fifties, and never mind that half of the people discussing the issue had never even heard of the award in question. And again, time is a Thing here, since Wilder died in 1957. But someone decided that the content wasn't culturally sensitive enough, and so the name of the award was changed. Technically it doesn't make a difference, and yet. In another fifty years, we'll probably be judging The Sopranos for being unfair to Italian Americans. Or mobsters. Possibly both.

[DearEvette]

My understanding is there has been criticism of the song for years.  Some from black women.  But it was ignored or brushed off or the sentiment was thought of as being too sensitive.

As far as I can tell, there has been no new groundswell of criticism, but that Mick decided on his own to remove it from rotation.  And even before this during concerts he has changed the lyrics to be not as terrible in places.  Maybe he just independently realized the lyrics are not great in the current environment.  Times and perspectives do change.  Other mediums stopped glorifying and romanticizing rape.   Despite the TMZ link there didn't seem to be some "woke" mob coming after him.   In fact from what I can find the most damning criticism of the lyrics came from a couple of white guy music critics over the past several years.

And Keith Richards can kiss my entire ass.  "I don't know what the beef with the sisters is."  Uh, first of you walking crater faced asshole, we are not your sisters.  And second his assertion that the song 'talks about the horrors of slavery" is a bold faced lie since Mick himself said years ago he wrote the song when he was high on drugs and sex and it was jut a mishmash of shit, with no meaning.  It sounds to me like he was simply fetishizing in the most base way the history of black female sexual degradation and dressed it up with a groovy bassline, a peppy beat and gyrating hips and since he was involved with a black woman at the time it somehow gave him a pass?  Yeah, why would black women have a beef about that? (rolls eyes)

Edited October 16, 2021 by DearEvette

[janie jones]

15 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

As far as I can tell, there has been no new groundswell of criticism, but that Mick decided on his own to remove it from rotation.  And even before this during concerts he has changed the lyrics to be not as terrible in places.  Maybe he just independently realized the lyrics are not great in the current environment.  Times and perspectives do change.

See this is exactly why it's nonsense to say some old dude "is a product of his time" when he gropes women for decades or says offensive shit. People have the capacity to change.

[BetterButter]

 

[Wiendish Fitch]

48 minutes ago, janie jones said:

See this is exactly why it's nonsense to say some old dude "is a product of his time" when he gropes women for decades or says offensive shit. People have the capacity to change.

I hate that argument, too. How do you live so long and not notice the world changing around you? That either makes you either Rip van Winkle or a fucking idiot.

[Mabinogia]

13 hours ago, GaT said:

Or, they literally had no idea what the lyrics were. If someone had asked me what I thought "Brown Sugar" was about before this all became public I would have said it was about some white guy having the hots for a black woman. I've seen that in a few places. 

That's pretty much what I thought. Back when the song came out it was a lot harder to find the lyrics, unless they were included in the album notes. There are tons of songs from that era that I listened to (and sang along with) as a child that I had no clue what I was singing, and just used words that vaguely sounded like what they were singing. 

I never liked the song but don't care if it is pulled or not pulled. I don't think it is nearly has harmful as some of those rap lyrics posted upstream, and even those aren't harmful if the parents of the impressionable children listening to them take a few minutes to explain that women shouldn't be treated that way no matter how much you like the performer. 

Just because some rich person says something is good or okay doesn't make it good or okay no matter if that rich person is black, white, wearing a suit or wearing jeans, a politician, an actor, an athlete or a singer, or born rich or born poor. They are only saying this shit because people buy it and it makes them richer. 

[Leeds]

9 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

That's pretty much what I thought. Back when the song came out it was a lot harder to find the lyrics, unless they were included in the album notes. There are tons of songs from that era that I listened to (and sang along with) as a child that I had no clue what I was singing, and just used words that vaguely sounded like what they were singing. 

 

Many moons ago I spent a year in France as a teacher's assistant.  I was very popular with the students because I would help them with the lyrics of British/American pop songs.  (I wish I'd kept copies of their original efforts because some of them were hilarious.  Though of course, there were no photocopiers back then, just those weird ink-filled drum roller mimeograph thingies.  Anyone else remember them?  I swear I still have ink stains on my hands.)

[Crashcourse]

56 minutes ago, Leeds said:

Though of course, there were no photocopiers back then, just those weird ink-filled drum roller mimeograph thingies.  Anyone else remember them?  I swear I still have ink stains on my hands.)

I loved the smell of mimeographed paper.  It was kind of addictive.  😄

Also, there's a scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High where the students put the papers up to their noses and inhale.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Crashcourse

[aradia22]

Quote

So should songs that tell stories only tell stories about good people? Movies, TV shows and books aren't held to that same standard? If they were i wouldn't have just finished a rewatch of The Sopranos.

Quote

Personally I'm anti censorship in almost all cases. If we only allow songs (movies, tv shows, books, etc) about 'acceptable' topics then art will be pretty bland and boring. 

On the other hand, why do we prioritize the stories of terrible people? (And let's be honest, I'm saying people but the majority of the time, it's men. We had a whole glut of male anti-hero shows that was never equaled in popularity or influence or quality by female anti-hero shows.) I think it's worthwhile to question the people making the art and question the people making the decisions about what art gets a platform. If a song becomes popular on Tik Tok, that's one thing. If a song is getting a ton of radio play, decisions are being made. If someone becomes popular on youtube, algorithm aside, to an extent, the public is deciding. That's different from being allowed to make a major motion picture or a TV show. 

This is not about Brown Sugar (which I still haven't listened to) but about general "censorship." You can't really ban things but you can decide what to give a major platform and those are definitely decisions. 

[Bastet]

3 hours ago, DearEvette said:

My understanding is there has been criticism of the song for years.  Some from black women.  But it was ignored or brushed off or the sentiment was thought of as being too sensitive.

Yes.  If someone says they never came across it, I believe them, but this idea that awareness and the resulting criticism of the lyrics didn't exist in any significant form until now is ridiculous, given how often the song popped up in "Songs With Offensive Lyrics" articles in mainstream publications, never mind forum discussions.

[DrSpaceman73]

Out of all the shows to associate her with they pick the least well known of them for the headline?  

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/katey-sagal-recovering-struck-by-car-185618732.html

 

[bobalina]

58 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

I loved the smell of mimeographed paper.  It was kind of addictive.  😄

Also, there's a scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High where the students put the papers up to their noses and inhale.

In high school all the stoners wanted to bee teachers assistants because you'd get high from that nasty, purple ink.

[Bastet]

7 minutes ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

Out of all the shows to associate her with they pick the least well known of them for the headline?  

"'The Conners' star Katey Sagal recovering after being struck by a car" is the headline.  The Conners is the show she's currently on (and she joined the cast in a recurring role back in season one [it's now season four]), and Wednesday's episode was about her character marrying into the family.  Seems logical to me.  If Rebel hadn't been canceled, I'd have picked that one, since she played the lead, but it was short-lived; The Conners is what she's currently associated with.

[Vermicious Knid]

Quote

But the song is a story told from the point of view of an appliance delivery guy who is jealous of the success of rock stars and is insulting them.

Like Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, which so many people try to ban because of the language. He was writing around 1880 about pre-Civil War attitudes he grew up with, the way people genuinely talked. And the actual content is anti-slavery. That's important even if it doesn't match 21st Century morality.

Then there's Song of the South, which Disney withdrew on their own. I saw it the very last time it was released in theaters, because it was a Disney movie I hadn't seen. The last time it had been out previously was about 15 years earlier I think. Let's say the world is not missing anything by it not being available. Not sure if the answer is to pretend it doesn't exist. If nothing else it's a good illustration of what casual, systemic, embedded racism looks like. Disney also censored Fantasia for the DVD release by eliminating the Black centaurettes and that one I absolutely agree with. They are servants to the White centaurettes and so offensively, disgustingly stereotyped eliminating them is the only answer.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

4 hours ago, aradia22 said:

On the other hand, why do we prioritize the stories of terrible people? (And let's be honest, I'm saying people but the majority of the time, it's men. We had a whole glut of male anti-hero shows that was never equaled in popularity or influence or quality by female anti-hero shows.) I think it's worthwhile to question the people making the art and question the people making the decisions about what art gets a platform. If a song becomes popular on Tik Tok, that's one thing. If a song is getting a ton of radio play, decisions are being made. If someone becomes popular on youtube, algorithm aside, to an extent, the public is deciding. That's different from being allowed to make a major motion picture or a TV show.

Except why stop there, or really, why should we stop there? I think we should also question the people who make the art popular, because nothing happens in a vacuum. I've had this discussion repeatedly over the years, and you're not wrong in saying it's usually male characters who are the most popular, no matter how terrible they are. But I don't think we can or should ignore that there's an audience for it, if it's because the actor is attractive or a nice person in real life. I'm sure Penn Badgley and Tom Hiddleston are wonderful and if I met them in person it would be awesome, but Joe is a murdering stalker and Loki is a borderline psychopath who doesn't always wash his hair.

[Kel Varnsen]

8 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Kind of? At least in the case of books. A year or so ago, Laura Ingalls Wilder's name was taken off of an obscure award for literature because of the way she described Native Americans in one of her books. Never mind that the wording was actually changed at some point during the fifties, and never mind that half of the people discussing the issue had never even heard of the award in question. And again, time is a Thing here, since Wilder died in 1957. But someone decided that the content wasn't culturally sensitive enough, and so the name of the award was changed. Technically it doesn't make a difference, and yet. In another fifty years, we'll probably be judging The Sopranos for being unfair to Italian Americans. Or mobsters. Possibly both.

I was thinking less about the product of the time issue and more about the context of the story/song/book and how a work of art about a bad person is going to have some bad shit in it.  Sure someone might criticize The Sopranos for Italian American stereotypes, but I don't think anyone would say that they really liked the show, but they really wished that Tony wasn't a racist, sexist, homophobic, murdering jerk. Anyone who said that would have completely missed the point.

[DrSpaceman73]

4 hours ago, Bastet said:

"'The Conners' star Katey Sagal recovering after being struck by a car" is the headline.  The Conners is the show she's currently on (and she joined the cast in a recurring role back in season one [it's now season four]), and Wednesday's episode was about her character marrying into the family.  Seems logical to me.  If Rebel hadn't been canceled, I'd have picked that one, since she played the lead, but it was short-lived; The Conners is what she's currently associated with.

Her name was not in the yahoo lead up that I saw like in the headline.  And if you want people to have the best clue as to who you are talking abou lt and realize it's her, I think naming what she is best known for and not just her most current role.  

I guess you could argue they want people to see the Connors be intrigued and click on it to read.  But I'd think knowing it's Katy sagal in the first place, which is not at all clear from the yahoo lead description, would he generate much more interest than mentioning The Connors.  

This happens quite a bit the internet description for the link does not match headline.  It's annoying.  

Edited October 17, 2021 by DrSpaceman73

[DrSpaceman73]

5 hours ago, aradia22 said:

On the other hand, why do we prioritize the stories of terrible people? (And let's be honest, I'm saying people but the majority of the time, it's men. We had a whole glut of male anti-hero shows that was never equaled in popularity or influence or quality by female anti-hero shows.) I think it's worthwhile to question the people making the art and question the people making the decisions about what art gets a platform. If a song becomes popular on Tik Tok, that's one thing. If a song is getting a ton of radio play, decisions are being made. If someone becomes popular on youtube, algorithm aside, to an extent, the public is deciding. That's different from being allowed to make a major motion picture or a TV show. 

This is not about Brown Sugar (which I still haven't listened to) but about general "censorship." You can't really ban things but you can decide what to give a major platform and those are definitely decisions. 

Censorship though is more after the fact things that have already become popular, so they are separate arguments and different discussions.  No one wants to censor unpopular, or at least unknown, things, what would be the point?   I know there was the Dr Seuss books last year and some argued they weren't popular anyway so they went out of print, but Dr Seuss was and is still popular 

Also censorship is different that alteration for a better version, though I realize it can be a fine line. Fairy tales we have been altering for literally centuries.  

But yes to your point the time to best argue about these things is before they come to the market and have a chance to become well known and cemented in pop culture.  That's not censorship.  That's tailoring the product ahead of time for maximum effect, in multiple domains. 

[aradia22]

Quote

Censorship though is more after the fact things that have already become popular, so they are separate arguments and different discussions. 

Quote

But yes to your point the time to best argue about these things is before they come to the market and have a chance to become well known and cemented in pop culture.  That's not censorship.  That's tailoring the product ahead of time for maximum effect, in multiple domains. 

 

Totally fair. I guess to take the Huck Finn example, that's still a kind of platform. It's already popular. Mark Twain isn't going anywhere. But does this need to be a book that all the high school students in that class are obligated to read? (You know, if they want to pass the tests and the class.) To me it isn't cancelling or censorship because the book still exists and you can find the book in a library but it's a question of what we put in front of people and what that implicitly says. Why Huck Finn? Why not Twelve Years a Slave or Beloved? (I'm just using this as an example. I think all teachers and school boards should question the value of the books being taught regardless of "controversy.") Jane Eyre doesn't disappear from the wider literary canon because you don't teach it in your class. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Vermicious Knid said:

Like Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, which so many people try to ban because of the language. He was writing around 1880 about pre-Civil War attitudes he grew up with, the way people genuinely talked. And the actual content is anti-slavery. That's important even if it doesn't match 21st Century morality.

My problem with those books being taught in schools is that they are often representative of the only type of anti-slavery books taught. The actual Black perspective is mostly ignored in favor what is still a pretty racist perspective. 

[MissAlmond]

America's Got Talent: Extreme pauses production after serious on-set accident.

https://deadline.com/2021/10/americas-got-talent-extreme-pauses-production-after-horrifying-on-set-accident-1234856551/

https://tvline.com/2021/10/17/americas-got-talent-extreme-production-shut-down-jonathan-goodwin-injured-accident/

https://ew.com/tv/nbc-shuts-down-production-americas-got-talent-extreme/

Edited October 18, 2021 by MissAlmond

[Bookish Jen]

On 10/16/2021 at 2:40 PM, Crashcourse said:

I loved the smell of mimeographed paper.  It was kind of addictive.  😄

Also, there's a scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High where the students put the papers up to their noses and inhale.

A scene my Gen Z nephew and niece would be completely befuddled by.

Edited October 18, 2021 by Bookish Jen
Edited for clarity

[Ohiopirate02]

8 minutes ago, Bookish Jen said:

A scene my Gen X nephew and niece would be completely befuddled by.

I'm at the tail end of Gen X and we still used those mimeograph machines when I was in school.  The high school I went to resorted to using them at the end of the year when the school used up it's toner allotment.  Did you mean Gen Z?

[Bookish Jen]

Just now, Ohiopirate02 said:

I'm at the tail end of Gen X and we still used those mimeograph machines when I was in school.  The high school I went to resorted to using them at the end of the year when the school used up it's toner allotment.  Did you mean Gen Z?

Egad, yes. I guess I'm not full awake. I better edit that.

[Crashcourse]

X, Y, Z...I get confused, too! 😄