So, while this is a bit selfish, I'm reopening it, with the caveat that for my topic, let's all be a bit nicer to one another, please. Now, for my post:

This is one of the first threads I've read where I have swung back and forth in my thinking about a topic which initially seemed like a no-brainer.

On the one hand, Bell is appropriating sexist/racist/violent terminology to sell a product. Whether or not there is a pre-existing market out there for such a product is neither here nor there; it's irresponsible and inappropriate for Bell to stoop to these levels.

On the other hand, there are new cell phones which can play MP3s as ringtones. This is the whole song with music, words, lyrics; everything. So...theoretically, a young person could download P.I.M.P. by 50 Cent, or "B****s ain't s*** but h**s and t****s" by Snoop Doggy Dogg (fill in the blanks with the most offensive words you can), or "B**** School" by Spinal Tap (a parody, but still) and have it ring out sexism every time they get a call (kind of like "If I had a hammer"...but the opposite). The technology is there for phones of all shapes and companies to blurt out sexist and racist statements until the cows come home.

As well, the (Five? Four? Three?) small number of existing non-independent record companies...I think it's Universal, Warner, Sony/BMG, EMI...have an interest in disseminating all kinds of terribly offensive music (and, not just hip-hop, btw) to a larger and larger market group. Some of these artists get to quadruple platinum sales through violent and sexist imagery.

Then again, there is a tremendous amount of context to the music created by "hip-hop" artists these days, far more than Cueball was able to summarize, and there is all kinds of subtlety in the lyrics and writings of these artists (even Eminem, believe it or not).

As well, it seems that all modern-day "hip hop" artists are being painted with the same brush. To go even further, some posters seem to be making some generalized statements about "black communities/men/women", and what "they" want, or whether "they" feel oppressed...as if there's one homogenous group of rappers and consumers, and they all agree about everything. I could be reading some posts out of context here, but that's the impression I'm getting.

So...what to do about it all? Well, as much I agree with Magoo that there's more context to the debate than simply the nefarious Bell, I disagree that we shouldn't target them for their shameless appropriation and sexist marketing. I also disagree that hip-hop music is to blame; this is simply an ignorant perspective, and by ignorant, I mean a perspective which is not informed by the history and multiplicity of the music. This is like saying action movies are to blame for vigilantism, etc. This is a medium, residing in a larger cultural medium. Hip-hop is a large and varied expression, involving everything from music to art to film to spoken word to activism. It suffers from all of the same problems the rest of society suffers from, but is also able to eloquently express frustration, positivity, experiences, story-telling, and revolution.

What I agree with Magoo about, however, is that we should be critical of how we consume media, and we should be allowed to criticize music and expression which we disagree with or find offensive. We have a right to dissect and criticize art.

These pimptones are part of a larger cultural paradigm, but it goes far beyond rap. Pimps are glorified because we live in a patriarchal society, and pimps are seen as the ultimate patriarchs: controlling, strong, mean, tough, violent, wealthy, sexually promiscuous, uber-heterosexual, etc. This is reflected in some rap music, but that's for the same reasons that it's reflected in the behaviour of heteronormative men, in the worst kinds of pornography (note: I'm actually pro-pornography; it's just that there's a lot of bad stuff out there), in movies, in halloween costumes...it's a cultural paradigm that stems from sexism.

i'm bombed, [as usual] and my beef with magoo is that he's managed to find fault with yet another no-brainer.

There's no reason why Bell should be cashing in on this blatant misogynism. Y'know what? I think this is Bell's answer to their pay-equity problems! I think they're scum.

And, as for hip-hop, let me stick to [white] eminem: He's obviously not a complete thug, and has had the courage to change as he's been exposed to criticism. But there's no way in hell that we should celebrate the misogynism and homophobia of his earlier work, or the dregs of same that persist.

The same goes [and excuse my cultural imperialism] for any other violent misogyny or homophobia that is puked out of severely oppressed and sick environments. I've posted before about how porno and prostitution have nothing elementarily wrong with them, ... heck, i'd even watch boxing if the chumps fighting weren't economic refugees on the loveboat of life, ... but slapping women and bashing fags is beyond the pale.

quote:

---

So your point is...? That Bell can have its misogyny, violence and racism, be out to lunch culturally, still make some money offa this - and we're just supposed to shrug because - ?

---

I think I was being a bit optomistic about popular culture...

But, you're right, Bell shouldn't get a pass just because they coattailing on the last gasp of a cultural trend.

Bell deserves to be boycotted for this brainless attempt to derive profits from what can only be described as 'hate' rock.

As some other posters put it:

quote:

---

On the one hand, Bell is appropriating sexist/racist/violent terminology to sell a product. Whether or not there is a pre-existing market out there for such a product is neither here nor there; it's irresponsible and inappropriate for Bell to stoop to these levels.

---

And another:

quote:

---

To say that the initiative of contacting Bell and utilizing consumer sovereignty is bad because it alone won't wipe sexism from the face of the earth is just plain stupid.

---

I too am disgusted by 'pimptones'...I guess my first post was in the hope that it was all coming to an end.

quote:

---

I disagree that we shouldn't target them for their shameless appropriation and sexist marketing.

---

I hope you aren't disagreeing with me, because I certainly didn't say that nobody should take Bell to task. Only that Bell is just a little leaf, not the trunk or the root.

quote:

---

To say that the initiative of contacting Bell and utilizing consumer sovereignty is bad because it alone won't wipe sexism from the face of the earth is just plain stupid.

---

Whew! I'm glad I didn't say that!

I don't expect anyone to solve all the world's big problems before they solve the smaller ones. And if a record company is somehow beyond action in a way that Coca-Cola, the Gap and Starbucks apparently aren't, then I think I can at least wonder why it is that anyone angry with Bell for this — and I don't mean someone who'd just like to see Bell pull the ads, but someone actually emotionally angry with Bell — wouldn't be at least as angry with what Bell's ringtones are parroting.

now that you've been cornered: I can't speak for those who didn't diss eminem 5+ years ago. But why you have to introduce pshychological shortcomingss to those who would pick on Bell NOW remains beyond me.

As i said, eminem has [sorta] grown out of his homophobia,mysogny, [i think, i'm not a clse follower of his stuff] but that was due to the same sort of criticism that's going Bell's way.

quote:

---

And I'm sorry, but saying "Oh, those record companies, they won't listen to me" doesn't really fly. We protest the United States Government. We protest Israel's occupation. We protest against Coca-Cola, Starbucks, the Gap, and McDonalds (while simultaneously NOT buying their product), but suddenly a record company is a losing battle, so let's not bother?

---

Do "we"? Is that the royal "we" Magoo? Maybe its my eyesight that is fading, since I don't think I saw you at the last Student Coalition Against the War meeting. I'll deal with it later on in the post, but again, my participation in things like that is about stimulating awareness and discussion, rather than thinking "oh, if I go to this rally, Iraq will be free and peaceful!"

Perhaps others have unlimited time and energy - I don't. I take what action I can, and have to be satisfied with that. So, in the case of a company with a limited geographic market, which provides what is to me a necessary service, where there is an easy alternative that is almost exactly the same, and which has shown that it wants my business (hence all those crap ads I get every month), I'm pretty sure that its worth my ten minutes to write an email complaining.

Now, I could write to the record companies, but they have a much bigger market, and don't particularly care IMHO what I think - I'm over 25, and don't buy a tonne of their stock. There also isn't, as Michelle points out, a parity service that doesn't offer misogynist music. Most of what I buy is local or indie - I don't give Sony, Universal, etc a lot of dollars, but I'm not going to not buy a cd by Jeremy Fisher (a guy from Hamilton that my friend played hockey with as a kid) because he has the misfortune to be on a label that carries people who offend me.

There is no parity product for Tori Amos. And, even if there were, considering the market out there, the fact that these companies have huge investments in the hip hop industry, and in artists whose fame come in part from their misogyny, means that its not going to happen that they stop producing that music. But it is likely that I can stop Bell from carrying an incredibly offensive ring tone.

Also, I think that my energy in dealing with the wide spread problem, misogyny in society and in hip hop, the relationship between art and free speech, etc., can be better dealt with through discussion, and my academic work. That's more likely to make a difference by talking to people who do listen to and make hip hop, and other cultural forms which glorify sexism, violence, etc., and opening space for consideration of alternate views and grey areas. With Bell, I see no grey area. With art and music, I have more concerns and reservations.

I am uncomfortable with the cultural appropriation angle. I don't think that glorifing violence against women, or portraying women as mere sex objects is okay regardless of cultural contexts. And I don't think that the subversive and challenging nature of some hip hop music that at times uses language I find offensive justifies the whole scale use of demeaning, sexist imagery by those who simply happen to use the same art form. The form itself is not immune from criticism - content makes a huge difference. I am also wary of censorship though, and of saying that one should never use this or that word. Its complex, and will inevitably lead to disagreement, and deeper thought than most people have given it. Again, I don't think the Bell thing is complex.

Okay, winding down:

quote:

---

You can tie yourself up in knots with ironic commentary and pointing out the hypocrisy in others. The well will never run dry in that regard. But at the end of the day, that usually ends up being an excuse to avoid action.

---

Word.

And I even have an answer to his question: why Bell only? Because it's a recent media news announcement, sexism in hip-hop isn't. Plus all the other reasons given by other babblers, such as, as consumers who support Bell and not the artists in question, it's an entrypoint for activism.

Okay, now onto some other points.

1. Rap isn't the same as hip hop. And vice versa. Now I'm no rap/hip-hop afficionado, but at least I know that!

2. Um, what about all the heavy metal/thrash metal/hard rock that is predominantly sung (I'm using that term loosely) by skinny white boys that is completely filled with hateful, sexist lyrics?

3. Sarah Jones on censorship and sexism in hip-hop here at Bitchmagazine.com. Click on "archives" and do a search for "hip-hop".

[edited because the direct link didn't work]

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by swirrlygrrl:
**warning - incredibly long post**

Word.

And thanks to periyar for the link to bell hooks. She's always interesting, and the voices of black feminists should be given weight in this discussion. However, regardless of what she or anyone else says, I still reserve my right to be offended by misogyny wherever I see it; hopefully I will try to have some understanding of why it gets expressed in certain ways, but it is never right or acceptable IMHO.

---

bell hooks was not in any way condoning the problematic sexist lyrics one finds in hip hop or rap in the article i posted. Her point was that it is as much a product of white american culture as it is black- mysogyny that is and that the artists that produce this stuff consume that culture. Finally, it'd be nice if people didn't lump all hip hop and rap in the same problematic category. There is a lot of interesting and progressive music out there that falls into these genres.

edited for some glaring typos.
[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: periyar ]

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: periyar ]

and what are you going to do about it? the points you've raised are good food for thought, but beyond that it's not very helpful. it's not as helpful as threatening bell that we refuse to be their customers if they don't change their sexist attitude towards women... because you know, this ring tones issue isn't the first time they've displayed disregard for women. also, magoo, it's terribly irrational to think that just because we haven't been marching peacefully in front of the EMI building protesting dirty lyrics doesn't mean we haven't been opposed to it. the thing is, how do we protest it? unless you have an answer to that question, you don't really have a right to dismiss our protests against bell as something meagre and hardly worth our time because there are bigger fish to fry. like cueball pointed out earlier, the entertainment industry thrives on shock and scandal. so, the usual forms of protest would be laughed at because all they are going to do is boost somebody's career further.

vmichel's post in the previous thread was excellent.

quote:

---

The well will never run dry in that regard. But at the end of the day, that usually ends up being an excuse to avoid action.

---

tell us, magoo, what action are you taking against hip-hop these days?

as for cultural appropriation:

quote:

---

posted by michelle:
But you're being inconsistent, skdadl. In one case, when hip hop artists do the "ho/pimp/bitch/skank" thing and sell it through a record label, you say you don't want to police them for "bad manners". When they do it and sell it through cell phone companies, you want to start a class action suit on behalf of women everywhere.

I just don't get it. In one case, it's cultural appropriation and in another case it's not?

--------------------------------

Why do we think that it's interfering when we want to tell people in the hip hop scene to stop buying misogynist hip hop music (or to try to pressure the record labels not to produce that music), but it's not interfering when we want to tell people not to buy misogynist ring tones, and for the phone company not to sell them?

---

i really fail to see it as cultural appropriation when we want bell to stop selling ring tones mainly because of this. i have a hard time picturing the execs at bell who decided to market these ring tones adorning themselves in bling-bling, walking that lazy funky walk where the left side of the body appears to be in a state of semi-paralysis so that it has to be dragged along by the right side of the body, wearing baggy pants where the crotch is located below the knee, and sometimes, the left pant leg is rolled up to the knee. i can't see bell execs being a part of hip-hop culture in either their personal or professional lives. maybe some of them occasionally bob their heads to a radio blaring snoop dogg somewhere in the background, but they are definitely not a part of hip-hop culture. they have zoomed in on one of the most negative aspects of hip-hop, and they have decided to make profits off of that. AND, it's the not first time - bell already has a history of portraying women in a negative light. that, therefore, is why it makes 100% sense to flood bell with our complaints and threats. it doesn't make sense to flood record companies with the same sort of complaints in the same sort of fashion because it will make the problem worse by making sexism ever more popular. also, we are really not in any position to make threats to record companies and make them feel vulnerable because they know we already don't buy hip-hop. we make no difference to them, and our opinions will be swatted down like flies on a wall.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: ephemeral ]

quote:

---

i can't see bell execs being a part of hip-hop culture in either their personal or professional lives. maybe some of them occasionally bob their heads to a radio blaring snoop dogg somewhere in the background, but they are definitely not a part of hip-hop culture. they have zoomed in on one of the most negative aspects of hip-hop, and they have decided to make profits off of that.

---

But, as I understand the term, anyway, that is one of the basic dynamics of appropriation.

To be truthful, I'm not exactly sure why. But I know that the answer to that question is the same answer to the question "why would I protest Bell instead of the music industry." I've been waiting for that answer to come to me before responding, but I think that day may never come, so here's my unformed thoughts on the issue:

The entire point of the Pimptones is to either shock or entertain your friends with the *hilarious* sounds of a pimp slapping his ho. There's not much else there. There's a lot more there with music. If some guy played a cut from a musician about a pimp slapping his ho over and over for the sake of amusing others with that content, I'd feel the same way about him.

Periyar, bcg and others have pointed out that there's not one Black Music monolith out there to react to. And likewise, you see this misogyny expressed in virtually all types of popular culture once you start looking - metal was a great example provided above. And look at all the posts in here about cultural appropriation, corporate structure, and so on. When the artist on your CD starts going on about pimps and hos, he's a product of all of that. Maybe he's being a misogynistic jerk. Maybe he's being ironic. Maybe he's deconstructing. Maybe he just wants to lay down a solid track and entertain. I don't know and, for whatever reason, I'm not too worried about it.

When some guy downloads a ringtone about pimps and hos, I think he's just being a misogynistic jerk. I don't really know if that's fair, but that's how I feel about it on a gut level. And so I apply the same judgement to the producer of the product.

quote:

---

I am uncomfortable with the cultural appropriation angle. I don't think that glorifing violence against women, or portraying women as mere sex objects is okay regardless of cultural contexts.

---

I don't think the point is that because something exists in, or comes from, another culture it becomes untouchable, and can not be critiqued. Earlier in this thread I posted an analysis of the use of this language as reaction to opression, and appropriation of terms by early rap (as BCTG would prefer,) which then was essentially reappropriated back into mainstream culture, without the underlying analysis. My point about cultural appropriation was that these terms embodied defiance, and took on distinct meaning, different from that of mainstream culture.

Words themselves are not demeaning there meaning can be. My point was not that the use of this terminology can or should be defended because of its cultural origins, quite the opposite. My point was that its usage should be attacked because it had now been adopted into mainstream marketing and no longer contains the alternate message of empowerement and defiance -- even revolution -- which made its use defensible in the first place.

Just as an aside BCTG: thing with Rap is that it has been squashed under Hip-hop glitz, though you are right there is a difference. I just use the term Hip-hop because that is what everyone knows to call it.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
But, as I understand the term, anyway, that is one of the basic dynamics of appropriation.

---

quote:

---

This is an interesting discussion, thank you. I am wondering if I am just checked out on the question of misogyny in pop culture, and I need to re-engange. I am also wondering if I've succumbed to the temptation of bullying, and am going after Bell because they are a nice easy target. There is a lot to think about here, thank you!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by periyar:
As for the cultural appropriation argument, hip hop has made it into the mainstream, but only a certain version of it- the sexist, consumerist focused one- gee, I wonder why it is that version gained prominence? I agree with emphemeral and the bell hooks article also touched on this, the negative aspects of hip hop are not necessarily confined to the black community- it is a reflection of american society as a whole so i don't really see the worry over appropriation.

---

Not through explicit repression but by exclusion.

This happened to Punk Rock also. Punk Rock was orginally very political, both right and left, bur mostly left and or agressively nihilist. Grunge came along and sanitized it, taking the form but removing the explicit poltical message. Grunge still contained loads of teenage rebellion and angst, but rather than beong focused on outward themes of operession, it became more and more focussed on the nihilist personal themes. The latter, though not exactly appealing to parents (many kids like pissing off there parents) does not directly confront the state or the economic inequalities it defends.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Well, whatever I was thinking, Cueball just said it better.

---

When Bell came out with their "cut-out body parts of women" print ad, I was in a position at the time to send out requests for letters of protest and to provide contact info for execs and updates to upwards of 3,000 people. When the word came that they had pulled the ad, it was met with great celebration.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

The selection process is quite interesting, because it is not explicit censorship, but censorship through exclusion. For instance a label might be considering "signing" two different artists, both equally popular, and both talented with strong songwriting skills. Yet one has explicit politcal message and the other focusses on more personal themes. The A&R rep will pick the latter over the former, even if they agree politically with the former because they know they are going to have a lot less hassles marketing the latter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by periyar:

Remember the group body count with ice-t- before he started playing a cop on tv- there was that song that he did about cops- it caused such a stir that even clinton came out to comment. I don't remember how the record company handled the 'controversy'.

So don't you think there is a monotiring and censoring of black cultural expressions when it challenges the power structure.

---

Sure there is. But that is occasional. What is more prevasive and has longer term impact is the assertion of economic controls through the labels and the process of selection of artists.

[ 03 August 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by periyar:

So don't you think there is a monotiring and censoring of black cultural expressions when it challenges the power structure.

---

I wonder if some of that is going on here, in a twisted way. I wonder if jumping all over Bell is our way of saying that a "black cultural expression" has crossed a line. Like it's OK to talk about pimps and hos in your own community, but don't be bringing it to my phone company.

I guess in that analogy the "power structure" would be a common feminist sensitivity, shared among those in an economic position to be consumers, which the Pimptones are challenging. Weird.

And if that's the case, is that good or bad?

quote:

---

Originally posted by periyar:

Remember the group body count with ice-t- before he started playing a cop on tv- there was that song that he did about cops- it caused such a stir that even clinton came out to comment. I don't remember how the record company handled the 'controversy'.
So don't you think there is a monotiring and censoring of black cultural expressions when it challenges the power structure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by vmichel:

I wonder if some of that is going on here, in a twisted way. I wonder if jumping all over Bell is our way of saying that a "black cultural expression" has crossed a line. Like it's OK to talk about pimps and hos in your own community, but don't be bringing it to my phone company.

I guess in that analogy the "power structure" would be a common feminist sensitivity, shared among those in an economic position to be consumers, which the Pimptones are challenging. Weird.

And if that's the case, is that good or bad?

Man, this whole thing is ambiguous the more I think about it.

---

On the one hand, I don't think that your first summary conclusion is true, vmichel, or at least I think there is a HUGE difference between your formulation and understanding that communities produce their own best critics and their own best leaders.

On the other, you raise a more general issue that I think swirrlygrrl touched on above as well. All North American -- but especially USian -- culture that becomes commercialized in any way at all presents us with just the puzzle you are struggling with there. All of it. Books. Classical music. Movies and pop music above all, of course. I write as someone who works in the industry, and believe me: it is an industry. Forget art. It is not about art, even though artists work for/in it.

In fact, in the current USian empire, the culture biz is second only to the military-industrial complex (major player: telecom companies) as a colonializing medium.

I mean, if people really want to get rigorous, people have to recognize that that is true.

That said, I think there are major structural differences between the telecom industry (again, I urge people to study the Macdonald Commish and what has happened since) and all culture biz, major differences between the ways in which they connect to the underlying imperial structures.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:

On the one hand, I don't think that your first summary conclusion is true, vmichel, or at least I think there is a HUGE difference between your formulation and understanding that communities produce their own best critics and their own best leaders.

---

Oh, I agree with that. I was wondering where my own community stops and starts. Where's the line? This discussion is making me think that my community starts where the expressions of the other community begin to challenge my power structure.

This bell hooks quote from the article got me thinking:

quote:

---

Mainstream white culture is not concerned about black male sexism and misogyny, particularly when it is unleashed against black women and children. It is concerned when young white consumers utilize black popular culture to disrupt bourgeois values.

---

1) Pimptones are bad/sexist/violent. Bell is to blame (at least to some extent) for marketing these products to people. Bell also has a history of sexist advertising. Bell is not, however, solely to blame for this.

2) Record companies (and other media companies) dominate mainstream music with -largely- commercialized, crappy music. In some cases, this music is sexist and homophobic and all the rest. In some cases, this sort of music is "rap" music. In some cases, this sort of music is "heavy metal" music. In other cases, this sort of music is neither.

3) "hip-hop" is different than "rap".

4) Some "hip-hop" music is violent and sexist and homophobic. Some "hip-hop" music is "political" and revolutionary and positive. Some is in between. Largely, the positive music tends not to be played on mainstream radio/television. This is a bad thing.

5) Corporations like Bell are appropriating terminology from other communities to sell products. Is this cultural appropriation? There is some debate on this in this thread.

6) Bell should be criticized for "pimptones". Major record labels should be criticized for promoting sexism/racism/violence. It seems to be the feeling of many babblers, however, that it is easier and more effective to address Bell than to address major record labels.

quote:

---

I described the one on the original post on the original thread. She was surprised and said: 'Wow. A lot of us wouldn't come to work if we heard that.' Hmm, another way to get Bell's attention, through the employees. . . .

---

Excellent.

Also, this is seriously hilarious:

quote:

---

Disconnecting apparently involves Soviet submarines.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by random:
Bell is doing an excellent job providing what its customers want. I think the 'pimptones' are kind of funny and I'd would consider using one.

---

Maybe you're onto something. I mean, I think it would be kind of funny if I kicked you in the nuts and recorded your howls of agony as your testicles retreated into your body cavity. Then I'd sell copies of the sound clip to my friends so they could have it as a ringtone. Gosh darn it, I'm starting to think that's downright hilarious. We'd all get a laugh and I'd make some money. Sweet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeatherM:
Disconnecting apparently involves Soviet submarines.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hinterland:
"We're the phone company, and we'll do what we bloody well want!"
At least Lily Tomlin used to make it sound funny. Now it's just sick.

---

Actually, it was:

"We are the phone company, and WE ARE OMNIPOTENT!"

I wish I had a poster of her saying that for my cube at work.