Daily Kos

Sense and Sensitivity on Imus

Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:39:08 PM PDT

Aunt B. from Tiny Cat Pants breaks it down in a post called  When All Else Fails Blame Black People for those who don’t understand the Imus incident.

The gospel according to Aunt B...

The problem is not that black folks are just sitting back quietly accepting whatever vomits forth from the record industry; the problem is that most white people don’t have the thoughts and opinions of their black peers even on their radar.  I doubt they even know how to find out what regular black people are thinking and saying about things.
And why would they?  Because as much as they grouch about Sharpton and Jackson, Sharpton and Jackson are on their TV screens spouting out opinions.  Most white people don’t have to do any work to discover what’s on the minds of Sharpton or Jackson, whereas hearing from actual black people who can’t get on cable takes a little more effort.  Far better to triangulate from the appearances of black folks on the news, ESPN, and BET what’s going on in the black community.
Never mind that that’s a little like watching CMT in order to figure out what white Nashvillians think about life.

And this completely dead on accurate comment down thread....

... Sometimes when points (like this one) seem completely obvious to the pointer-outer (me, in this case), the pointer-outer can skip over a few steps, assuming everyone else also sees those steps. And, if you don’t, it can make it very confusing to see how I ended up here.
So, here are the givens that I didn’t articulate:

  1. There is still a way that, in our society, something is not really a problem until white people notice it.
  1. Because we don’t consider problems really real or really well-dealt with until white people notice them, we often overlook the hard work that black people do to fix their own problems.
  1. This really sucks for black people because it means that huge corporations can afford to ignore their concerns, because those concerns don’t matter until white people notice. (Take rap, for instance. If the numbers we saw tossed around yesterday are true, 80% of the audience for rap is white. That means that every single African American person could stop buying rap music tomorrow in protest of the treatment of black women and it wouldn’t matter that much. The vast majority of the rap audience would still be there.)

Which leads me aside to 3a. just for a second, because what’s being overlooked here in all these arguments about how "well, black men call black women hos in rap music" is that black men call black women bitches and hos in order to sell music to white folks. Do you see what I’m getting at? Rap music, as it is now, is controlled by enormous record companies and is shaped to present a message that sells to its audience–the message its audience, who are primarily white folks, want to hear, the message they’re buying is about how much black women suck. For white folks to act as if they’ve had no role in shaping the message of popular rap music–as if the problem is just how black men disrespect black women–and then act as if it’s those black men’s fault for saying those words...

snip
Dear Aunt B. cotinues on to bring the analysis home...

So, obviously, I’m not black, so I can’t speak for black folks, but it seems to me that why black people are so irritated about this is that they have been complaining all along–they just can’t get heard–and that, in order to get heard, they have to get white people to take up their cause, when it’s white people in the first place who are creating a demand for this kind of music and yet white people don’t want to take responsibility for creating that demand.
That’s what makes me so mad about the whole "well, black people use that kind of language in their music" argument, because it leaves off the important second part "so that their largely white audience will continue to buy their records." And I think it looks like we want to help solve a problem in the black community (rap music), when, really, it’s a problem the white community has–that we love it when black people degrade themselves for our entertainment.

Yeah,  it makes me mad too.  I listened to Scarborough Country for a few moments after KO ended the other night. (I know.  That was a mistake.)  I quickly changed the channel when I saw that his first story was going to be a rant against hiphop and a rehash of "But black people say it."  I’m still waiting for some white commentator to talk about the seemingly insatiable appetite of many white people for images of degraded black and latino women.  I would like to see that acknowledged on the ‘liberal’ blogs.  

So when we talk about the evils of rap music, let’s talk for awhile about one of the most popular rappers and producers out there today; Marshall Mathers, or EminEm.  He is infamous for his woman hating, momma hating lyrics.  And his musical acolytes follow in his footsteps.  His is the evil genius behind 50 cent and several other highly popular, yet anti female rap acts.  Mathers is white. Visit his website, please.  See what I mean.  And yet, the misogyny in rap is all coming from black people?  Nonsense.  This man even has his own channel on Sirius radio.

Any thinking person who listens to hiphop music knows that there is a growing cynism and realization that artists are selling out.   And resistance to the destruction of hiphop is growing.  But knowing that would mean that you had to listen to hiphop other than the dreck they play on Clear Channel stations.  

Tags: Don Imus, hip hop (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 14 comments

  •  There is some hypocrisy in the Imus incident (8+ / 0-)

    Some, mind you.

    Now, I was no fan of the Imus program.  As I've said in other discussions (including one I diaried myself) I think his show was never very funny and so riddled with commercial interruptions as to be unlistenable.  And, while he backed Kerry and was liberal, or seemingly so, on some things, he was also a big Bush booster post-9/11 and for some time afterward.

    Furthermore, his remarks were inappropriate and, it should not be forgotten, inaccurate.  The Rutgers women did nothing to merit his bile.  Whether the punishment fit the crime can -- and will -- be debated.  As I said, I never liked the show so I really don't care that it's ended.  That's between Imus and his sponsors and the networks.

    That said, I am annoyed at the hypocrisy here.  Don Imus made a racist remark, and was banished from the airwaves.  Yet Al Sharpton has not only made racist remarks, but contributed via his rhetoric to a riot that led to loss of life -- yet he has suffered no consequences.  From Tawana Brawley to Crown Heights to the Duke lacrosse players Sharpton stirs up the pot of racial animosity and divisiveness, but nevertheless is treated as some sort of moral authority.  He is not.

    Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh can break drug laws and make utterly disgusting comments about a Parkinson's victim, and his little media train chugs on in all its self-satisfied glory.

    Don't even get me started on Anne Coulter.

    So why did Imus, in particular, get punished?  I'd like to think this is just the beginning of a new trend toward a more civil public discorse, but I wonder?

    "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

    by Jon Stafford on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:50:00 PM PDT

    •  Most of us want Rush et al gone too. (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Jon Stafford, inHI

      The difference here is that generally they go after PUBLIC figures like politicians and celebrities, people who have chosen to step into the spotlight.   When Rush called Chelsea Clinton a dog, he got trounced--but not taken off the air (I wish they had).  WHen La COulter  made remarks about the 9/11 widows, her stock fell, almost hitting bottom.  I suppose you could amke a case for the Jersey Girls  being semi=public people becasue they are spokeswomen for a group, but I think mso tof Am,erica would disagree. And the Rutgers women were NOT public persona by ANYONE'S definition.  Women's BB isn't like men's--- there aren't household names, and they don't get drafted to the pros.   We ned to monitor the right-wing idiots and start catching them--and tryoin gto get coverage form palces like Media Matters--and then maybe we can take them down too.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:32:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm going to play devil's advocate here (4+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        MajorFlaw, Demena, LI Mike, vesticular

        Firstly, by choosing to become players on a top-rated women's basketball team, the Rutgers women were at least semi-public figures.  No, women's sports doesn't get nearly as much attention (an interesting topic for a future conversation), but it does get some.  When they're in the Final Four they get quite a lot.  And there is a such thing as the WNBA for those who choose to continue a career in sports.

        Further, the assertion that these women were horribly damaged by Imus's remarks is not only a fallacy, but is insulting to the women themselves.  These are intelligent, accomplished, self-confident young women, and I have no doubt that it takes more than the offhand blatherings of a 66-year-old shock-jock to shake them up.  I wouldn't be surprised if most of them had never even heard of Don Imus before this.  Certainly his relevance to their lives was nil.

        I fully agree with you that the arch-conservative radio hosts should be held accountable for what they say.  Indeed, all of us should be held accountable for what we say.  That includes Don Imus.  For what it's worth, I have a feeling that Imus' remarks reflected less a racist/sexist intent than a piss-poor attempt at mimicking what he perceived as the language of hip-hop culture.  That's not to defend him -- it was a stupid, hurtful thing to say.  I'm just annoyed that others who regularly say hurtful, stupid things suffer far less severe consequences.

        "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

        by Jon Stafford on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 12:01:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Never said they were damaged. (0+ / 0-)

          No. They were insulted and reviled by a racist misogynist.

          They behaved beautifully. If it had been ME he insulted, I would probably have picke dup the phone and called him just that.

          And you are so off that by playing a college sport, they're semi-public figures. I guess the guys and women on the fencing team at  State U Nowhere are also semi=public figures. High school spaorts are big in the South and West. The teams soemtiems ven get covered on local TV. Does that make THEM  semi-public figures?  IN ME, they actual;ly CARRY some of the high school games locally. Your definition is WAY too broad.

          More to the point,the public agrees with ME, not you. Even more important is what Bill Maher pointed out:  These women were not the strong, the powerful. They were ordinary people just living their lives-- who chose to get to go to college via  athletic scholarship. They aren't Kobe Bryant or Michael Jordan.  Attacking them is NOT the same as going after Coulter.  It's a big old bully picking on  the weak and defenseless.  Maher is right, and you are wrong here.

          The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

          by irishwitch on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 12:16:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Bill Maher is not always right (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            ormondotvos

            Although he's usually pretty close.

            But seriously, I stand by my assertion that as basketball players on a Final Four team, even a women's team, these women are semi-public figures.  Note the "semi."  Women's basketball at Rutgers gets a lot more attention than "the fencing team at State U Nowhere" (which, by the way, I resent -- I went to State U Nowhere and it was a fine school).  And yes, I suppose that prominent high school athletes in places where high school athletics are prominent are also semi-public figures.  Note that "semi" again.  I'm not saying they're Kobe Bryant, but they're well-known at least among a certain fan base.

            And they are strong and powerful in the sense that they are among the academic and athletic elite.  These women will likely all go on to graduate schools and six- or even seven- figure incomes.  That puts them well ahead of the curve compared to most Americans.

            Imus was wrong to pick on them -- I absolutely agree with you on that.  But to say that they have been somehow "damaged," as opposed to insulted, is simply ridiculous.

            "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

            by Jon Stafford on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 01:09:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Did anyone say they were "damaged"? (0+ / 0-)

              their feelings were hurt and they were insulted, dishonored, s it were.  

              The Duke Lacrosse tesot of us tried to keep an open mind but a lot assumed they were guilty.

              The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

              by irishwitch on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 12:26:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, quite a lot of people (1+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                ormondotvos

                I'm not saying you did.  But it was all over the media, and this forum, about how these women had been "irreparably damaged" and that Imus' remarks had made all their accomplishments "worth nothing."  Those kind of assertions are just ludicrous.  Hell, an argument could be made that Imus' ignorance only served to highlight their accomplishments and make them look even better by comparison.

                "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

                by Jon Stafford on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 01:43:49 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Metihnks you a re bending over backwards (0+ / 0-)

                  in Imus' direction here. And that you really don't get that an insult can be damaging--not physically but emotionally.  

                  The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

                  by irishwitch on Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 01:33:34 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  This may well be the best (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Jon Stafford

          analysis of the situation I've seen anywhere, after days and days of this.  Too bad it was completely lost on...oh, nevermind.  

          Many a thief is a better man than many a clergyman, and miles nearer to the gate of the kingdom. - G. MacDonald

          by vesticular on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 12:28:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  people have to stop obsessing about Sharpton.. (0+ / 0-)

      Sharpton stirs up the pot of racial animosity and divisiveness, but nevertheless is treated as some sort of moral authority.  He is not.

      I didn't vote for George W. Bush. I don't know a single black person who did. I think Bush is a liar, a crook and a criminal.  Bush doesn't represent my views at all.   With all that said, George Bush is the President of the United States, there is a large group of people who did vote for him and support him.  

      TOUGH SHIT FOR ME!!! C'EST LA VE

      I don't know a single white person that likes Al Sharpton, many think hes a crook, and a hypocrite. They don't think Al Sharpton represents their views. BUT, there is a large group of people who do support Al Sharpton.  you don't like it?

      TOUGH SHIT FOR YOU!! C'EST LA VE  

      nobody treats Sharpton as a moral authority, they treat his as a black person who represents a constituency.

      There were hundreds of others who spoke out against Imus, not just Sharpton and Jackson.   the National Association of Black Journalist, the National Organization of Women both condemed Imus.  But for some reason people are just fixated on crying over Sharpton and Jackson to even acknowledge the other groups.

      •  Because... (0+ / 0-)

        ...I feel, when Sharpton starts showboating around, his presence serves to negate the validity of the whole argument.

        Extreme example: Anyone arguing the same point as, say, David Duke would immediately be discounted, even if the point was valid.  The difference is that the mainstream media don't treat David Duke as legitimate.

        I'm right with you about Bush, though.

        Tough shit for all of us, I guess.  C'est la vie.

        "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

        by Jon Stafford on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 01:48:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I'm with King.. (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    debedb

    Hypocrisy is always running rampant when people start blaming an entire "race" for their problem...

    No forgive me, I forgot that we're all humans for a second. Unless being a white guy gives me super cool laser vision or something, I think it's wrong to use the term race.

    When someone like Sharpton or Rush start blaming the blacks or the whites for their problems, it's time to deafen the ear to their rhetoric.

    They are the shock jocks of their respective causes, all shock and no value. Personally I don't exactly enjoy rap, I did when I was younger but now that I've moved beyond certain things, I like to think I've also moved beyond certain tastes.

    If someone likes rap, joy. Though blaming music for so many social ills strikes me as a weak cop out.

    I must defer to MLK on this one, I would prefer to be judged based on the content of my character then what color skin I was born with it.

    It's sad though that to many people seem to think just because they were born white, black, brown, it entitles them to special consideration.

    Cynics regarded everybody as equally corrupt... Idealists regarded everybody as equally corrupt, except themselves. -Robert Anton Wilson

  •  Speaking of Don... (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Caldonia, debedb

       The wire services report that Don Ho died today.  What will Imus have to say?

Permalink | 14 comments