Spin Off: Why do we pick and choose when we want to separate an artist s personal life and their art
Options
Elzo69Renaissance
Members Posts: 50,708 ✭✭✭✭✭
OB s position on Nate Parker brings up an ironic issue...the fact that ppl pick and choose when they want to separate an artist s personal life and their art....@obnoxiouslyfresh initially refused to go see Birth of a Nation because of some things which have transpires in Nate Parker s personal life yet I'm sure @obnoxiouslyfresh is nt sitting down when she out and a R Kelly ( child molester) song comes on or still listen to James Brown ( woman abuser, drug addict) and prolly had no issue watching the James Brown bio pic...
Hell name me an artist and I can point out some ? ? they did in their personal lives so why the selective outrage?
Btw just using OB as an example
Hell name me an artist and I can point out some ? ? they did in their personal lives so why the selective outrage?
Btw just using OB as an example
Comments
-
Ya know...
Don't bring James Brown into this. -
:joy:
you gotta be specific when a dressing this, i made a thread like this before.....there's a lot of people in the world...
just cuz one group of people are saying one thing, and another equally sized group is saying something in contrast....it's crazy to think those groups are the exact same people just because they seem to be the same size.....
i know you used ob as an example, but if ob came in here and said she didn't ? with rkelly after the ? with the little girl, as many people have said, your entire argument is dead....
cuz until you have a person that's willing to explain themselves on both issues, you're just wildly assuming that people operate in that double standard, and ultimately it proves for a lazy argument...
that's like dro's thread downing people who watch madea cuz they ain't see birth of a nation
i don't watch madea movies, so he completely missed me with that ? ....i do wanna see the nate parker film, but i ain't get to the movies opening weekend, and i might not get theere this weekend either...
does that mean i'm not supporting the film cuz i don't have the time to make it out there....guess what i'm a comic book head, i love comic book movies, and i still haven't seen civil war or ant man...
i love boxing, i missed most recent fights cuz im either working or they come on channels i don't subscribe...
i miss a lot of wrestling and i love wwe...
my point is when you base an argument off of assumptions it's in high danger of falling flat...
which is ironic, cuz ob may come in here defending rkelly..
who knows...
-
I think the choice is easier, if it's a person or genre of art you had no interest in seeing or spending money on any way. I think it's a scapegoat that's used to not support something or someone they wouldn't have supported anyway. Also it could be that people rank certain offenses higher than others.
-
People will let things slide if they like the persons art. In the Reason Troy Ave is one of the most hated artists for reasons like "he's too arrogant" "he's disrespectful" but will support whomever they like and ignore their disrespectfulness and arrogance. It's a double standard. With Nate Parker he's been around for a minute but he wasn't a big name prior to BOAN, so it's easy for many people (especially women) to hate him because he hadn't built up any equity in the past for people (especially women) to look past the ? allegations.
-
Becuse amurica
-
Michael Jackson
-
obnoxiouslyfresh wrote: »Ya know...
Don't bring James Brown into this.
THAT part. -
I still ain't see that james brown movie...
I had the privilege to see him live at the taste damn near 20 yrs ago...that aint a man u can act out....at least i dont think -
Personally, I can separate the person from the action.
I'll use two examples of how I can and another example of how other people can and do as well.
Exhibit 1.
I think Donald Trump is a despicable human being, would make a horrible president, and a glowing example of exactly what White privilege is in America.
With that said I think he's very entertaining. He is so boastful with his ignorance it makes him even more entertaining and a bit of an anomaly. No matter how stupid or bad the ignorance he projects he remains defiant.
Exhibit 2
I believe some White folks absolutely loathe Blacks especially when hearing most Southern Whites political positions and views in regards to how they perceive people who aren't like them.
Those same White folks will go to a sporting event and cheer a Black person on like they are a brother. I hear quite a few of my little Southern co-workers talk about how they love listening to Kevin Hart (I think he's corny as hell, but I respect his hustle). Those same White folks love some Black culture to I come to the events at work they playing Michael Jackson and Al Green.
Now when it comes to expressing empathy or understanding with Blacks on any social issues that's where those Whites go to left field and their true opinions of us start to surface. -
Yalp be missing me with this supppsed white on black camaraderie via entertainment/ sports
Respect aint a prerequisite of being entertained...its can actually be easier to be entertained by those you despise in some instances -
some people are just hypocritical like that. Miranda Lambert comes to mind. She went in on Chris Brown at the 2012 grammy's which was the same show glen campbell got an award yet, didn't mention one word about what he did to tonya tucker... The same fools that's givin trump a pass for grabbin ? by the ? is the ones that wanted to castrate jameis winston for his lunch room comment and vice versa. You can't expect much from people.
-
The Cosby show is still top 5
Off the wall - Dangerous Michael Jackson is still the Goat ( I don't know about the molestation charges...moreso for his weirdness)
If white people can forgive Charlie sheen they shouldn't have ? to say about nate. -
-
I also touched on a related topic, sort-of, a while back - some ? about taking rappers' lyrics seriously.
This is kind of different though. I can see some legitimacy to an artist's real personal life (not lyrics) impacting your support for them. But I think people only use that ? when they already have other reasons they don't like them. -
Elzo69Renaissance wrote: »OB s position on Nate Parker brings up an ironic issue...the fact that ppl pick and choose when they want to separate an artist s personal life and their art....@obnoxiouslyfresh initially refused to go see Birth of a Nation because of some things which have transpires in Nate Parker s personal life yet I'm sure @obnoxiouslyfresh is nt sitting down when she out and a R Kelly ( child molester) song comes on or still listen to James Brown ( woman abuser, drug addict) and prolly had no issue watching the James Brown bio pic...
Hell name me an artist and I can point out some ? ? they did in their personal lives so why the selective outrage?
Btw just using OB as an example
I Consider Myself Agnostic But I Do Belong To The Church Of Latter Day Saints Founded By The Godfather James Joseph Brown...Please Do Not Slander Thy Lord In A Public Or Private Forum -
When the issue affects someone emotionally they tend to be less forgiving. I've seen ? leftists advocate for ? like capital punishment when it comes to sexual assault, despite the fact that anyone with 15 minutes worth of sociology education can tell you the death penalty tends to lead to higher crime rates.
-
Human beings are garbage...the end
-
im jus tryin to figure out why are we as a people so critical of these stars and athletes and not these preachers and politicians??!
THATS what be ? me up.. -
Support is earned not obligated.
And this ^5th Letter wrote: »People will let things slide if they like the persons art.
Also Nate Parker did it to himself with his attitude. All the women I know just don't like his attitude on the subject. Which all could have been avoided by 1) not doing interviews or 2) "no comment"
-
Support is earned not obligated.
And this ^5th Letter wrote: »People will let things slide if they like the persons art.
Also Nate Parker did it to himself with his attitude. All the women I know just don't like his attitude on the subject. Which all could have been avoided by 1) not doing interviews or 2) "no comment"
Did you ask them what his attitude should've been?
A lot of hypocrisy with this ? when it come to Nate Parker and his so called attitude. ? is to be expected at this point though. -
Support is earned not obligated.
And this ^5th Letter wrote: »People will let things slide if they like the persons art.
Also Nate Parker did it to himself with his attitude. All the women I know just don't like his attitude on the subject. Which all could have been avoided by 1) not doing interviews or 2) "no comment"
Did you ask them what his attitude should've been?
A lot of hypocrisy with this ? when it come to Nate Parker and his so called attitude. ? is to be expected at this point though.
No. I don't know what he was supposed to do either. I left it alone though. -
BOSSExcellence wrote: »im jus tryin to figure out why are we as a people so critical of these stars and athletes and not these preachers and politicians??!
THATS what be ? me up..
It's a very hard thing to explain but I think most people see athletes and celebrities and think they are people who are employed or people who can be exiled from their position easier. That makes them an easy target to attack when they ? ? up.
On the flip side when Preachers, Politicians, and Parents, when they ? ? up the majority view them in a position where we know they ? up but it will require more work to get them exiled. I think the thought of knowing it will be a harder task to replace a George W. Bush than a Ray Rice turns people away. Almost like they see it as a battle that will require too much so why bother. It's why sooo many people are easily going at Kap but they won't focus that same energy to go at the team owners. I don't agree with that line of thinking but that's one reason why I think it plays out that way. -
Support is earned not obligated.
And this ^5th Letter wrote: »People will let things slide if they like the persons art.
Also Nate Parker did it to himself with his attitude. All the women I know just don't like his attitude on the subject. Which all could have been avoided by 1) not doing interviews or 2) "no comment"
Did you ask them what his attitude should've been?
A lot of hypocrisy with this ? when it come to Nate Parker and his so called attitude. ? is to be expected at this point though.
From what I've seen simply acknowledging that it's a difficult situation would've been enough which he did in his Ebony interview. The rest though he did come off as crass towards sexual assault in general. Just no empathy at all. I think that's what turned some people especially many women who are and have been victims themselves. -
As for the thread itself I think it comes down to how big is that person's contribution and just how much what that person did may relate to you personally. For instance my best friend loves Big Pun but hasn't been able to listen to his music since that footage of him pistol whooping his wife came out because his dad used to beat his mom. Same with someone who was a victim of abuse not being able to listen to R. Kelly. If you haven't actually been through it it may be hard to relate as to why seeing someone celebrated who has also committed certain offenses may bother people to that extent
-
BOSSExcellence wrote: »im jus tryin to figure out why are we as a people so critical of these stars and athletes and not these preachers and politicians??!
THATS what be ? me up..
Never understood why people have higher expectations for change from an athlete or singer than someone whose actual job it is to work to accomplish those things like a politician
