UK graduate thrown out of gay club after "triggering" Blurred Lines is played

Kev W · 05-08-2015 11:10AM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Does this eejit not use two alternating pronouns? How does someone who actively uses multiple pronouns fit clearly in your spectrum? Or is it a seasonal spectrum?

"They" as a pronoun works for anyone. Unless you object to being referred to as "they" then you yourself allow for alternating pronouns by your own definition.

pmasterson95 · 05-08-2015 11:10AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Knowing what it is and understanding something are two completely different things, my friend.

(I'm not your friend, guy).

Did you ask this mass of living cells if they want to be called "guy"?

You insensitive labelling bigot.

pmasterson95 · 05-08-2015 11:11AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i have always hated that. I feel your pain.

So it is cold then?

galljga1 · 05-08-2015 11:11AM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

****.

Hello Earthling? Does that offend aliens? Is nothing safe?

Yeah, you need to go broader than that. From time to time a few visitors, not of this planet, frequent boards.

ohnonotgmail · 05-08-2015 11:12AM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

So it is cold then?

*wibble*

ohnonotgmail · 05-08-2015 11:12AM

galljga1 wrote: »

Yeah, you need to go broader than that. From time to time a few visitors, not of this planet, frequent boards.

its a lot more frequent than that.

The King of Moo · 05-08-2015 11:12AM

Liamario wrote: »

Is she having a laugh. I'm sure there are people out there traumatised by nursery rhymes, should we ban them as well. Silly individual.

Suggesting an announcement before it's played is a bit much, but...
the lyrics of the song are particularly obnoxious, and there's no ambiguity about whether they suggest that no doesn't always mean no.
For me, it goes beyond the usual misogyny of lots of rap and hip hop and gets into some very creepy territory.
I can totally understand why some people are repulsed by it. I find it repulsive (if musically catchy, but we can probably thank Marvin Gaye for that), so I can understand if lots of women and rape victims find it even more repulsive.
I don't think it should be banned, but I can understand some clubs refusing to play it, and I don't think there's any harm in drawing people's attention to its creepiness, as lots of people don't really listen to they lyrics of pop songs.

Everybody get up, WOO!
Everybody get up, WOO!
Hey, hey, hey
Hey, hey, hey
WOO!
Hey, hey, hey
WOO!

[Verse 1 - Robin Thicke:]
If you can't hear what I'm trying to say
If you can't read from the same page
Maybe I'm going deaf
Maybe I'm going blind
Maybe I'm out of my mind
[Pharrell:] Everybody get up

[Bridge - Robin Thicke:]
Ok, now he was close
Tried to domesticate you
But you're an animal
Baby, it's in your nature
Just let me liberate you
You don't need no papers
That man is not your maker
And that's why I'm gon' take a

[Hook - Robin Thicke:]
Good girl
I know you want it
I know you want it
I know you want it
You're a good girl
Can't let it get past me
You're far from plastic
Talk about getting blasted
I hate these blurred lines
I know you want it
I know you want it
I know you want it
But you're a good girl
The way you grab me
Must wanna get nasty
Go ahead, get at me
[Pharrell:] Everybody get up

[Verse 2 - Robin Thicke:]
What do they make dreams for
When you got them jeans on
What do we need steam for
You the hottest bitch in this place
I feel so lucky,
Hey, hey, hey
You wanna hug me
Hey, hey, hey
What rhymes with hug me?
Hey, hey, hey
Hey!

[Bridge]

[Hook]

[Verse 3 - T.I.:]
Hustle Gang Homie
One thing I ask of you
Lemme be the one you back that ass up to
From Malibu to Paris boo
Had a bitch, but she ain't bad as you
So, hit me up when you pass through
I'll give you something big enough to tear your ass in two
Swag on 'em even when you dress casual
I mean, it's almost unbearable
In a hundred years not dare would I
Pull a Pharcyde, let you pass me by
Nothin' like your last guy, he too square for you
He don't smack that ass and pull your hair like that
So I'm just watching and waitin'
For you to salute the true big pimpin'
Not many women can refuse this pimping
I'm a nice guy, but don't get confused, this pimpin'

[Breakdown - Robin Thicke:]
Shake your rump
Get down, get up-a
Do it like it hurt, like it hurt
What you don't like work
Hey!

[Verse 4 - Robin Thicke:]
Baby, can you breathe
I got this from Jamaica
It always works for me
Dakota to Decatur
No more pretending
Cause now you're winning
Here's our beginning
I always wanted a

[Hook - Robin Thicke]

[Outro - Pharrell & Robin Thicke:]
Everybody get up, WOO!
Everybody get up
Hey, hey, hey
Hey, hey, hey
Hey, hey, hey

A little worse than a nursery rhyme, no?

jungleman · 05-08-2015 11:12AM

I just find the story laughable to be honest.

I work a hateful retail job while I'm finishing my postgrad, and although I hate it, if anyone came up to me and asked me to stop selling a particular item because it "triggers" them, I'd tell them to f*ck off as well.

As far as the whole "binary" part of the story goes, I just think it's grossly stupid. How dare someone not refer to me as a lamp, don't they know that I identify as a lamp??!! It's laughable.

The two morons need a reality check. And a clip around the ear.

The Corinthian · 05-08-2015 11:13AM

Kev W wrote: »

Complete consistency in fact. Since it's impossible for a living person to be Napoleon Bonaparte as he is dead, the fact of Bonaparte's death is sufficient proof that anyone claiming to be him is at the very least lying or delusional.

No, you are inconsistent. Your problem is that you are happy to allow self-identification when it suits, yet not when it does not. Identify is subjective, but only when you say so.

As to evidence, all you've managed to muster up is that sexuality and orientation is on a sliding scale (if you actually bother to read what you've posted), not actual gender. And even if gender were, you've yet to show where it can be self-identified and be considered accurate or even sane to do so. In fact, it has long been known that not all that identify as transsexuals are in fact transsexuals, which is why they need to go through a process of psychological evaluation before any treatment can commence.

All you appear to be doing is defending some, frankly, spoilt middle-class college girl and a current fashion for people to self-identify.

pmasterson95 · 05-08-2015 11:13AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

*wibble*

:P

hatrickpatrick · 05-08-2015 11:14AM

galljga1 wrote: »

Not sure. I thought SJWs were those who supported the outraged and easily offended.

Pretty much, but also those who feel that certain content should be censored for everyone because it offends them, which is exactly what all this berating DJs for playing certain music amounts to.

ohnonotgmail · 05-08-2015 11:16AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

Suggesting an announcement before it's played is a bit much, but...
the lyrics of the song are particularly obnoxious, and there's no ambiguity about whether they suggest that no doesn't always mean no.
For me, it goes beyond the usual misogyny of lots of rap and hip hop and gets into some very creepy territory.
...

A little worse than a nursery rhyme, no?

I think you need to listen to more rap and hip hop.

pmasterson95 · 05-08-2015 11:16AM

jungleman wrote: »

I just find the story laughable to be honest.

I work a hateful retail job while I'm finishing my postgrad, and although I hate it, if anyone came up to me and asked me to stop selling a particular item because it "triggers" them, I'd tell them to f*ck off as well.

As far as the whole "binary" part of the story goes, I just think it's grossly stupid. How dare someone not refer to me as a lamp, don't they know that I identify as a lamp??!! It's laughable.

The two morons need a reality check. And a clip around the ear.

I love lamp

zeffabelli · 05-08-2015 11:17AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

Suggesting an announcement before it's played is a bit much, but...
the lyrics of the song are particularly obnoxious, and there's not ambiguity about whether they suggest that no doesn't always mean no.
For me, it goes beyond the usual misogyny of lots of rap and hip hop and gets into some very creepy territory.
I can totally understand why some people are repulsed by it. I find it repulsive (if musically catchy, but we can probably thank Marvin Gaye for that), so I can understand if lots of women and rape victims find it even more repulsive.
I don't think it should be banned, but I can understand some clubs refusing to play it, and I don't think there's any harm in drawing people's attention to its creepiness, as lots of people don't really listen to they lyrics of pop songs.

A little worse than a nursery rhyme, no?

Music dance and art has always been dirty, sexy, filthy, earthy and playing with boundaries. That's what makes them so much fun.

Should we ban elvis because of his pelvic choreography? Shakespeare for his dirty jokes? Rodin? Egon Schiele?

Music and dance has always been rebellious to sexual codification. Because they are tied into the body in a way other forms aren't.

The sender police and feminists are like the new nuns for the 21st century.

hatrickpatrick · 05-08-2015 11:17AM

Kev W wrote: »

Personally I don't know why anyone would want to but I wouldn't want it banned as I don't believe banning things really helps. Letting it exist and allowing people to have their say about it is a better solution.

This. But the new breed of radical SJW / "feminist" (quotes intentional) type does not believe in this, they believe that anything which offends anybody should be censored, and that anyone who objects to it is guilty of the same crime that the content is guilty of. So in other words, by objecting to Blurred Lines being banned, you and I are not merely believers in free speech, but actual rape apologists in their eyes. And anyone who objects to the censoring of racial slurs, is themselves automatically a racist.

galljga1 · 05-08-2015 11:17AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

Suggesting an announcement before it's played is a bit much, but...
the lyrics of the song are particularly obnoxious, and there's no ambiguity about whether they suggest that no doesn't always mean no.
For me, it goes beyond the usual misogyny of lots of rap and hip hop and gets into some very creepy territory.
I can totally understand why some people are repulsed by it. I find it repulsive (if musically catchy, but we can probably thank Marvin Gaye for that), so I can understand if lots of women and rape victims find it even more repulsive.
I don't think it should be banned, but I can understand some clubs refusing to play it, and I don't think there's any harm in drawing people's attention to its creepiness, as lots of people don't really listen to they lyrics of pop songs.

A little worse than a nursery rhyme, no?

Little Jack Horner sat in a corner
Because he had a square ar$e

jungleman · 05-08-2015 11:19AM

@King of Moo

I'm not going to quote your comment because all of the scrolling would drive everyone mad.

It's a sleazy song but the way everyone lost their minds over it was a bit much. It's a song. Just a song. People have become so egotistical and self obsessed that a song is enough to send them into a frenzy.

People need to get outside, go for a walk, and get their sense of perspective back.

The King of Moo · 05-08-2015 11:19AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think you need to listen to more rap and hip hop.

If a lot of it's at the level of "Blurred Lines" I'd rather not.
Even if there are worse songs lyrically, it doesn't justify the awfulness of "Blurred Lines'" lyrics.

05-08-2015 11:19AM

She posted a conversation between herself and the club manager / promoter on her twitter

I can't link, but it's from the 4th of May.
@GeorgiaG92

There's 5/6 screenshots of their messages.
Read them, and figure it out yourself. Incredible stuff really.

tritium · 05-08-2015 11:19AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'd say it's because of the lyrics, which are overtly misogynistic and have dodgy ideas about consensuality.

Misogynistic, possibly though that songs writers have a different view than the outrage posse who saw a chance to get some headlines off someone else's creative work. Dodgy on consent? Well only if you ascribe to a very narrow interpretation given by agenda groups pushing outrage and ignore a significant amount of the songs lyrics that don't fit that narrative...

Plus, the line "You know you want it" was also the line used by her rapist.

And his does this equate to a right of censorship? Should a club, catering to thousands of people get it's song list approved by all patrons? How far should we take this? Can I object to certain national anthems at sports events because they trigger memories of colonial oppression? Can I insist certain movies are never shown because they trigger memories of the death of a loved one? Or should we expect people to be adults and maybe just go to the bar when these come on?

My point that you responded to was actually a general one. Should we put the protection of precious little flowers ahead of everything else? Should one person be able to restrict others just to satisfy their own needs? Let's say I really want to hear that song because it reminds me of a good or special time in my life, why would I be any less deserving if being accomodated here?

Dave_The_Sheep · 05-08-2015 11:20AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

A little worse than a nursery rhyme, no?

Of course it is.

Is it disrespectful to women treating this hypothetical woman like nothing more than a cheap sex object? Absolutely. If they're OK with that, that's fine.

I'm not sure it promotes rape though, after reading the lyrics. "I know you want it" doesn't mean "I know you want it and I'm going to give it to you regardless of what you say".

Maybe I don't think about it enough.

hatrickpatrick · 05-08-2015 11:20AM

zeffabelli wrote: »

The sender police and feminists are like the new nuns for the 21st century.

It's actually astounding how they manage to consistently miss this fact. Most of them despise social conservatism if you ask them, for obvious reasons - and yet half of what they preach is essentially an extreme form of social conservatism, just using different criteria.

It creates amusing cognitive dissonance when these folk are confronted with the fact that their "ban everything" crusades match up fairly well with people like Rush Limbaugh, Donald Trump etc. Usually causes quite a bit of fluster and an abrupt change of subject.

Kev W · 05-08-2015 11:22AM

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, you are inconsistent. Your problem is that you are happy to allow self-identification when it suits, yet not when it does not. Identify is subjective, but only when you say so.

As to evidence, all you've managed to muster up is that sexuality and orientation is on a sliding scale (if you actually bother to read what you've posted), not actual gender. And even if gender were, you've yet to show where it can be self-identified and be considered accurate or even sane to do so. In fact, it has long been known that not all that identify as transsexuals are in fact transsexuals, which is why they need to go through a process of psychological evaluation before any treatment can commence.

All you appear to be doing is defending some, frankly, spoilt middle-class college girl and a current fashion for people to self-identify.

Your problem is that you think believing oneself to be non-binary is equivalent to believing oneself to be a dead emperor. One is physically impossible, the other is not. You've beaten that false equivalency into the dirt by now, it simply doesn't work.

Incidentally, since there is a process of psychological evaluation before gender reassignment surgery can commence and that hasn't stopped gender reassignment surgery from happening, doesn't that indicate that one can be born with a gender identity distinct from their physical sex? Someone must be passing these evaluations.

All you seem to be doing is defending a DJ who publicy verbally abused a woman because she expressed a negative opinion about a song he was playing.

bucketybuck · 05-08-2015 11:23AM

Kev W wrote: »

I specifically said if it wasn't obvious.

If it wasn't obvious?

How is gender not obvious? Are you saying that if you see tits you don't check gender? That you only ask if the person is ugly and has a flat chest? Are you saying that attractive people don't have gender issues?

Your views appear to be extremely offensive and ignorant of the realities of gender.

HardenendMan · 05-08-2015 11:23AM

"What's your pronoun preference?"

Ahh ha ha ha ha. Funniest line ever.

hatrickpatrick · 05-08-2015 11:24AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

If a lot of it's at the level of "Blurred Lines" I'd rather not.
Even if there are worse songs lyrically, it doesn't justify the awfulness of "Blurred Lines'" lyrics.

Of course it doesn't, but nothing can justify censorship on the grounds of offence - not unless we want to rewind the clock on social liberation from various thought police over the centuries, most recently the church.

Kev W · 05-08-2015 11:24AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

If a lot of it's at the level of "Blurred Lines" I'd rather not.
Even if there are worse songs lyrically, it doesn't justify the awfulness of "Blurred Lines'" lyrics.

Don't let that rubbish tar the entirety of hip hop for you. there's great stuff out there.

galljga1 · 05-08-2015 11:25AM

What think ye of this lady?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11678667/Rachel-Dolezal-who-pretended-to-be-African-American-says-she-identifies-as-black.html

zeffabelli · 05-08-2015 11:26AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's actually astounding how they manage to consistently miss this fact. Most of them despise social conservatism if you ask them, for obvious reasons - and yet half of what they preach is essentially an extreme form of social conservatism, just using different criteria.

It creates amusing cognitive dissonance when these folk are confronted with the fact that their "ban everything" crusades match up fairly well with people like Rush Limbaugh, Donald Trump etc. Usually causes quite a bit of fluster and an abrupt change of subject.

It astounds me too how the feminists and egalitarianists can't see the Puritanism and how they are out to destroy fun and everyone's sex lives with their political bull****.

Now you have these morons invalidating consent if under the influence of alcohol, so essentially have taken my adulthood away from me.

razorblunt · 05-08-2015 11:29AM

galljga1 wrote: »

That would be 2. It's non binary.

Bah, I hate those non binary folk.

UK graduate thrown out of gay club after "triggering" Blurred Lines is played

Comments