I have a problem with future.

[DGMacphee]

I wouldn't call it love ...

Admit it -- It is sweet, sweet lurve!

So, be it Rap/Rock/Hip-Hop/Country/Whatever, if it 'glorifies' violence, drugs, or other bad things, I consider it shit.  Songs about those things where the point is, 'they're bad', are okay (in my opinion).

But there are a lot of songs that glorify drugs and violence that are really good songs, like the ones I've mentioed.

And like I asked in my previous example, would you also hate Scorsese or Tarantino films because they glorify drugs and violence?

I mean, it sounds like you're judging the merits of songs based on the same methods that the Capalert website uses to rate films. (http://www.capalert.com/capreports/index.htm)

It's like you're discarding any artistic merit just because such songs glorify drugs and violence.

I just think there's some that is inappropriate for younger audiences.

Refering back to Capalert, here is their review of Saving Private Ryan -- in it, they say the film is inappropriate for children due to the violence and because the soldiers swear a lot:

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/savpvtryan.htm

They completely disregard the fact that the film is portraying a period in history where there was a lot of violence and soldiers did swear, especially when their Germans were shooting their buddies.

Likewise, gangsta rap demonstrates an aspect of life that most people in ghettos have to face -- blinding children to that makes them ignorant of problems in society.

[Trapezoid]

A lot of gangsta rap displays its own brand of ignorance. I'd like to hear a rap song with at least a vague sense of morality, something that's about getting away from the drugs and violence rather than embracing it. This genre may expose children to the problems of ghetto life, but it doesn't describe them as actual problems often enough.

[Darth Mandarb]

Pulp Fiction:
Uma Thurman does coke, then sniffs 'The Monster' up her nose.  The scene that follows wouldn't exactly, in my opinion, qualify as 'glorifying' drugs (funny sure, but not glorious).

Resevoire Dogs:
The violence in that movie, in the end, gets them all killed and very bloody.  I wouldn't say that glorifies violence.

Casino:
Joe Pessi's character was hilarious, and very violent, but in the end he got a bullet in the head.  I don't think thats glorious either.  The tag-line is "No one stays at the top forever".

A lot of music now-a-days doesn't make the point that, in the end, drugs and violence get you nowhere.  They just try to make it seem cool.

There are other ways of preventing 'blinding children to that' and 'making them ignorant of problems in society'.  Glorifying a degenerant way of life isn't one of them.

There may very well be some musicians who believe they're making social commentary.  My guess is that most of them just want to make money and don't care about the consequences.

Aerosmith - Janey's Got a Gun, that certainly doesn't glorify what she's done.  She was backed into a corner and had to fight back.  She's a fucked up little girl who killed her own father.

Woke up this Morning - Alabama 3.  I don't know this song, but I know a song with the same name by Nickelback.  If it's the same song it's certainly not painting a pretty picture.  And is a great song!

Purple Haze - Hendrix.  What a great song!  I wonder why he hasn't released an album since the 60's??

[Nacho]

I think there is a fact that makes "violent rap" more dangerous than some of the stuff DG refered to... Whereas that "white" songs talking of drugs and violence are aimed to "average" people (Who doesn't really care of the lyrics), Rap enters deeply in the Ghettos, where people has it easier to go for the bad road.

I really see Daniel's point; violence and drugs do exist, and, yes, it can be hipocrital to deny it... but keeping the message of violence in the ghettos what is not going to do, for sure, is to help.

[DGMacphee]

Pulp Fiction:
Uma Thurman does coke, then sniffs 'The Monster' up her nose.  The scene that follows wouldn't exactly, in my opinion, qualify as 'glorifying' drugs (funny sure, but not glorious).

But one could interpret the humour as glorifyinh drugs. i.e. Hey you can get into a wacky situation like this.

Resevoire Dogs:
The violence in that movie, in the end, gets them all killed and very bloody.  I wouldn't say that glorifies violence.

Yeah, but you're looking at the end result -- what about individual scenes, like say Michael Mann cutting the ear off the police officer.

Despite that Tim Roth blows him away, it still glorifies violence as a "fun" thing to do.

Casino:
Joe Pessi's character was hilarious, and very violent, but in the end he got a bullet in the head.  I don't think thats glorious either.  The tag-line is "No one stays at the top forever".

Forget Casino -- it's at the bottom of Scorsese's films.

I'm talking Taxi Driver, where Travis Bickle blows away everyone to save Iris, the hooker.

A lot of music now-a-days doesn't make the point that, in the end, drugs and violence get you nowhere.  They just try to make it seem cool.

There are other ways of preventing 'blinding children to that' and 'making them ignorant of problems in society'.  Glorifying a degenerant way of life isn't one of them.

There may very well be some musicians who believe they're making social commentary.  My guess is that most of them just want to make money and don't care about the consequences.

These are just broad generalisations -- you're not providing any basis for this.

Aerosmith - Janey's Got a Gun, that certainly doesn't glorify what she's done.  She was backed into a corner and had to fight back.  She's a fucked up little girl who killed her own father.

That IS glorifying it -- It's using violence to solve a problem.

Woke up this Morning - Alabama 3.  I don't know this song, but I know a song with the same name by Nickelback.  If it's the same song it's certainly not painting a pretty picture.  And is a great song!

No, the Nickelback song pales in comparison to what I'm talking about.

The song in question is about a wife who kills her rotten husband with a shotgun.

It's the same song used at the opening on the Sopranos.

Purple Haze - Hendrix.  What a great song!  I wonder why he hasn't released an album since the 60's??

The song STILL GLORIFIES DRUGS, genius, even if he died from an overdose.

I mean, by that logic, you'd consider gansta rap songs to be brilliant if all the artists died from overdoses.

No, you're just using ridiculous logic now.

[Layabout]

I don't have a problem with most rap music. I do have issues with songs aimed at the mid teens that focuses on sex, drugs and alcohol.

It's the same with teen magazines like cosmo and what not. Teenagers are very impressionable, and they are trying to fit in, rebel, whatever.

Some rap/hip-hop music aimed at the mid teens music is really sending out the wrong message. Songs where drinking and sex is glorified. I've seen 15 year olds drunk. Drinking leads to unwanted (and sometimes wanted due to the influence of pop culture) sexual activity including hand-jobs, blow-jobs, sex, etc... They are a product of the way corporations (including record labels) are marketing to the youth of today.

This may seem odd coming from a hard drinking, smoking, and most definitly sexually promiscuous member of society. But I did not choose this lifestyle until I was old enough not to be influenced by trends and media propaganda and knowing the consequences of my actions. Young people have not yet developed these skills.

And drinking is being marketed to young girls thanks to the onslaught of the 'lolly water' chick drinks that are prominantly advertised to young women in magazines and television. Guys are marketed the mixed spirit 'manly' drinks like Jim Beam and colas in magazines and television.

In summary, no-one should blame just one genre of music on all the world problems, it is a current market trend to glorify alcohol, drugs, sexuality and smoking to the teenagers of today. I don't think it's a good trend, but it is working. Just like it was cool in the 1980's to wear fluro and have a big arse mullet, it is cool to drink, smoke and fuck in the 2000's.

Just remember, about 80%* of the fluro wearing, mullet sporting teens of the 80's have turned in to well-adjusted human beings.

*made up figure to prove a point, but probably close to the truth...

[Darth Mandarb]

But one could interpret the humour as glorifyinh drugs. i.e. Hey you can get into a wacky situation like this.

This is a weak argument IMO.

Yeah, but you're looking at the end result -- what about individual scenes, like say Michael Mann cutting the ear off the police officer.

Isn't the end result where the message comes across?  (Michael Madsen)

I'm talking Taxi Driver, where Travis Bickle blows away everyone to save Iris, the hooker

Yeah, and how does the movie end?  I haven't seen it a long time and can't really remember.  My hunch is that's it not really a happy ending for Mr. Bickle.

The song STILL GLORIFIES DRUGS, genius, even if he died from an overdose.

Again, the end result proves my point.  He glorifies the very thing that killed him at 27.  How absolutely GLORIOUS!!  You'd think people would learn.

These are just broad generalisations -- you're not providing any basis for this.

"There may very well be some musicians who believe they're making social commentary. My guess is that most of them just want to make money and don't care about the consequences." (this is the only one of the three quoted  that could be interpreted as a 'broad generalization')
If I had used a specific artist for this reference I would have been accused of thinking I know what somebody else is thinking.  That's why I said it was 'My guess'.  Do you know for a fact why Hendrix wrote Purple Haze?  Do you know for 100% sure he wasn't just out for the money and feeding on the popular opinions of the 60's?

Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm using 'rediculous logic'.

It's a different point of view that I'd wager a lot of people on these forums agree with.

Only they are aware (as I am) that debating with you is pointless 'cause you never stop disagreeing until the thread gets locked.

[Trapezoid]

Why does "violence" keep getting lumped in with "sex and drugs"? I think it's a shitty replacement for "rock and roll". At least sex and drugs feel good, even if they can lead you down a completely wrong path.

[Darth Mandarb]

Just to clarify:

I'm not blaming everything on gansta rap.

I'm blaming it on 'lack of positive role models'.

In ANY fashion.  Music, art, TV, movies, advertising, etc.

~ d

[Layabout]

Sex without the proper knowledge or ignorance of protection can lead to Pregnancy, which can seiously fuck up a persons life.

Drugs can seriously fuck up a persons life, and lead to prison.

Violence can seriously fuck up a persons life.

See the link???

And on your comments Darth, it is okay to lay the blame on these other factors, but you main focus is a minority aspect of the problems. Anyway, how many mulleted fluro wearing bogans do you see these days???

[Trapezoid]

There's still a huge difference. Violence is never about enjoying yourself. It's just pure negativity.

[DGMacphee]

But one could interpret the humour as glorifyinh drugs. i.e. Hey you can get into a wacky situation like this.

This is a weak argument IMO.

Yeah, but you're looking at the end result -- what about individual scenes, like say Michael Mann cutting the ear off the police officer.

Isn't the end result where the message comes across?  (Michael Madsen)

You obviously don't know kids very well, do you?

Kids don't look at the end result and messages -- They just see Michael Madsen acting cool and cuting a cop's ear off and forget about him getting blowed away.

And even then, Tim Roth uses violence to solve his problem.

And Harvey Keitel uses violence to solve his problem.

Same with Pulp Fiction -- Tavolta uses drugs, and he's cool.

Forget about Uma though.

And don't get me started on glorification of violence in Kill Bill.

So once again, why single out gansta rap when there are other glorifications of violence and drugs.

Seems a little biased to me -- You're just justifying violence and drugs in things you do like.

I'm talking Taxi Driver, where Travis Bickle blows away everyone to save Iris, the hooker

Yeah, and how does the movie end?  I haven't seen it a long time and can't really remember.  My hunch is that's it not really a happy ending for Mr. Bickle.

Wrong -- he was praised as a hero.

Go watch it again if you don't believe me

The song STILL GLORIFIES DRUGS, genius, even if he died from an overdose.

Again, the end result proves my point.

No, it doesn't, because...

He glorifies the very thing that killed him at 27.  How absolutely GLORIOUS!!  You'd think people would learn.

People don't learn.

It's very easy to get the idea that "death from drugs" is cool.

Thus, the song is still glorifying drugs (and you haven't proven otherwise) and Hendrix himself glorifies drugs (and I've proven why).

These are just broad generalisations -- you're not providing any basis for this.

"There may very well be some musicians who believe they're making social commentary. My guess is that most of them just want to make money and don't care about the consequences." (this is the only one of the three quoted  that could be interpreted as a 'broad generalization')
If I had used a specific artist for this reference I would have been accused of thinking I know what somebody else is thinking.  That's why I said it was 'My guess'.  Do you know for a fact why Hendrix wrote Purple Haze?  Do you know for 100% sure he wasn't just out for the money and feeding on the popular opinions of the 60's?

Yeah, like I can see record companies desperately capitalising on a black man in a period where racial tensions were at their peak in the 60s -- Yeah, it was all about the money.

You obviously don't know the 60s very well.

Hendrix was successful because he was talented.

And it's pretty obvious that Purple Haze glorifies drugs just by reading the lyrics.

Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm using 'rediculous logic'.

No, but you are using ridiculous logic when you make a point that's illogical.

It's a different point of view that I'd wager a lot of people on these forums agree with.

Yeah, and a lot of people at one stage thought the Earth was flat.

Only they are aware (as I am) that debating with you is pointless 'cause you never stop disagreeing until the thread gets locked.

Darth, you're boardering on getting personal here.

Besides, you don't even have to debate with me.

Let me take you back to your orignal argument:

I blame the degredation of society on two things:
1) mass media
2) MTV

I've provided a lot of reasons that demonstrate that MTV and mass media are pretty minor compared to a lot of things that really cause degredation to society.

However, if you want to believe mass media and MTV are the sole causes for everything that's fucked up in society, be my guest.

Ignore corrupt governments.

Ignore big businesses that push their companies overseas, utilising slave labour leaving hundreds upon thousands of domestic workers unemployed.

Ignore lack of funding into public schools.

Ignore more education on sex so that teenage girl doesn't get pregnant.

Ignore gun-runners and drug barons that illegally import weapons and crack into the country.

Blame everything on gangsta rap, MTV, and sensational media, if you know best!

[Darth Mandarb]

Darth, you're boardering on getting personal here.

Calling me 'genious' and calling my logic 'rediculous', isn't bordering on personal?
Disregarding everything I type just because you don't agree isn't bordering on personal?

Other people's opinions and ideas aren't wrong just because you don't feel/think the same way.  That's arrogance.

Sounds like you know best.

I'm done arguing with you.

Pirate - As I mentioned earlier, at first I got the impression this conversation was about rap, so I went that direction.

Anyway, how many mulleted fluro wearing bogans do you see these days???

I guess that depends on where you live!  Where I lived in Michigan there were loads of them around.

[Layabout]

This thread started out as a complaint that the future would be crap due to the fact that teenagers are easily influenced by popular culture. The thread creator wrote up a pretty inaccurate and closed minded opinion on this.

These are issues that will have no significant impact on the future, it is the broader issues DGMacphee bought up that do have an impact.

Every teenager fucks up in some way or another, it's part of life. Sure you may not like it, but that is how society operates.

It may be sad, because this is what you see firsthand, but it is insignificant to the very real issues DGMacphee bought up, which you generally don't see.

And that is it. And Darth, there is no use arguing with DGMacphee, he is right, and if you continue, he will surely eat your balls.

If you want to start a thread to state your opinions on how mass media is corrupting the youth of today, go ahead. Just research your information more thoroughly before you post. I would be happy to add my input as that is a topic that I quite enjoy.

[DGMacphee]

Calling me 'genious' and calling my logic 'rediculous', isn't bordering on personal?

First of all, would you prefer me to call you "idiot" or "loser" to genius?

I think "idiot" and "loser" is getting personal -- calling you "genius" isn't that personal cause, hey, you seem to be certain that MTV and mass media re the bane for all the problems in the world.

Am I being facicious? Maybe, but that's not because I think you're not a genius -- it's because I don't think you've thought carefully about your original argument i.e. "MTV and mass media are the causes of society's problems"

Second of all, yes, I did call your logic ridiculous -- Because, yes it was a ridiculous argument in the context you placed it.

But I didn't call you "ridiculous" -- that would be personal.

If you want to interpret those things as getting personal, that's your problem, but I didn't mean either of them as an attack on you.

I like you and want to have your babies.

Disregarding everything I type just because you don't agree isn't bordering on personal?

I never disregarded what you said -- where did I type "I disregard everything you type"?

I said, you were making broad generalisations, but no where did I say "I disregarded that whole broad generalisation".

It just would be helpful if you could actually back up your argument with exmaples and facts.

Other people's opinions and ideas aren't wrong just because you don't feel/think the same way.  That's arrogance.

No, but other people's ideas are wrong when they're illogical, as I said earlier.

That's not arrogance -- that's just pure common sense.

Sounds like you know best.

I'm glad you put that in italics, cause me being a moron would never have guessed that sentence was directed at me.

I'm done arguing with you.

Good. I've made my point too.


Look, to show there's no hard feelings, I'll pay you a compliment:

he will surely eat your balls.

But that'd take all week!!!

BOOM-CHING

[evenatlab]

argh, my eyes always scan over DG's "reply to every word of person I'm arguing with" posts.  

Because, DG, it is so obvious you are out to debunk that person by looking for as many arguments as possible.  Which waters down whatever original debate started the whole mess.  You ruiner of debate, you.

[evenasDG]

argh, my eyes always scan over DG's "reply to every word of person I'm arguing with" posts.

Well, it seems to me a devoted person would take the time to read such marvelous inquiry and inflamatory remarks!  

Because, DG, it is so obvious

Oh, but nothing ever is!

you are out to debunk that person

Debunk, is that like when I threw my sister out of her bed? What an ignorant use of vocabulary!

by looking for as many arguments as possible.

Oh I do not!

Which waters down whatever original debate started the whole mess.

Perhaps these arguments, although more shallow, are more INTERESTING than the original debate, and I have every right to derail it!

You ruiner of debate, you.

I'm rubber you are glue, stick your finger up your ass. Smells like poo!

[DGMacphee]

I had something to contribute to this thread in terms of discussing problems with society, which was the whole point of the thread in the first place.

Of course it's obvious that I'm out to debunk someone with as many arguments as possible -- that's the whole point participating in debates.

I mean, if you're not going to use arguments to prove your point, why bother participating in a debate in the first place?

I think I've been fairly civil in this thread -- I haven't resorted to name calling or sarcastic put-downs for once.

Darth Mandrub may not accept my point of view and I'm not forcing him -- I'm not sticking a gun to his head saying "You have to agree with what I say!"

We argued to the nth degree and I think we've both made ourselves very clear -- I think we've been very democratic.

Beside, I stated the true answer to this thread ages ago:



SIXTY-NINE, DUDES!!!!

EDIT: Also, if you don't like my replying style then fine -- I can't do much about it because it's my style. I do it so people won't be confused as to who and what I'm replying to.

[Las Naranjas]

The vast majority of the rap/r&b [in the pop charts they blur alot] that I see on TV is boy girl stuff. Sex yes, drugs and violence?
Middle class kids singing about titties and enfatuation, sounds like most pop from the past 5 decades, except the innuendo is less veiled these days

[Archangel (aka SoupDragon)]

I'd like to hear a rap song with at least a vague sense of morality, something that's about getting away from the drugs and violence rather than embracing it.

I've heard plenty.