On Friday, Rush Limbaugh opened his third hour by pointing out that some conservative bigwig had met with Time Warner executive bigwigs about supposedly obscene music.
The sample lyrics that the conservative bigwig used to illustrate the moral depravity in pop music were from a Nine Inch Nails song. I don't know the song (I'm not the biggest NIN fan), but I believe it is titled "Man With a Big Gun."
The lyrics include numerous uses of the f-word. They describe the speaker's desire to put a big gun up to someone's head and put a hole through their head and/or ejaculate on this person's face.
(For the life of me I don't know why the bigwig didn't choose "Closer to God" as his sample depravity instead. I mean, really. "I want to fuck you like an animal / You bring me closer to God"? I think that would have made his point much better. But I digress.)
Anyway, I simply wanted to point out several facts which Rush did NOT mention:
(1) This is not just an obscene song, this is a song about forced rape. Either:
(1a) The singer is in favor of forced rape, and wants people to get big guns, point them at people's heads, and rape them; or(2) Nine Inch Nails, or NIN, is composed of precisely one person, or at least was last I heard. That person is Trent Reznor.(1b) The singer is against forced rape, and the lyrics are ironic, satirical, sarcastic, or otherwise not to be taken at face value.
(3) Trent Reznor is a friend of Tori Amos. Nine Inch Nails is mentioned in one of her songs ("Precious Things," to be specific), and Trent sang backup on another song ("Past The Mission"). Flip through rec.music.tori-amos and you'll see a number of .sigs that quote both Tori and NIN.
(4) Tori Amos is possibly most famous for her opposition to rape. Her first solo album, in fact, includes a song about being raped by a man with a gun. This song was written from personal experience and is very meaningful to her. She makes sure to sing this song at every engagement she plays. She has established an organization called RAINN, which I believe stands for Rape, Abuse, Incest, and Neglect Network.
I believe interpretation (1b) is unquestionably the correct one. I'm assuming most Rush listeners aren't fans of NIN and don't understand Trent's bitterly sardonic style, but even they should be able to figure that out with the aid of the above facts.
In other words, Rush read an anti-rape, anti-violence song on the air and presented it as if it were encouraging rape and violence.
To quote NIN: "I think you owe me a great big apology."
I might add that Rush has no defense. A few weeks ago, he responded to a USA Today article that printed a quote from him, and he began his response by noting that the words he says on the air look very different in print, even though they were not out of context or misquoted. In other words, Rush knows full well that transferring words from one medium to a different one can have a large impact on their meaning, yet he went ahead and did exactly that anyway. Also, it goes without saying that a transferral from the medium of alternative rock music to spoken words is a lot more significant than from spoken to printed words.
At this point, Rush has two possible new arguments which he could try:
(A) Trent should have found a kinder, gentler way to phrase his meaning. This argument deserves nothing more than a good laugh.
(B) Trent should be aware that some stupid, crazy people will misinterpret what he says, and may well act on it. Trent is thus acting irresponsibly by singing as he does.
At which point I bring up G. Gordon Liddy's telling parents to give their children handguns before they go into a dangerous school, and his telling people to fire on BATF agents executing search warrants. (The famous "head shots, head shots, kill the sons of bitches" comment.) Which is more irresponsible?
harold hutchison (hhutchison@cornell-iowa.edu):
Let me say this much: If Bill Bennett and a liberal Democrat BOTH go and say these lyrics are bad, I will take THEIR word for it as opposed to a fan of said group.
cook (cook@rzdisk.enet.qntm.com):
I agree with you there. I've been to see Nine Inch Nails. I was at the now famous Boston Garden show, third row center. Their fans are weird! All these little goth children and some even in dresses (males). I told the people I was with at the time, "Gee, I wonder what will become of these kids in ten years?"
buck satan (buck@dreamscape.com):
Jesus, are YOU a fucking idiot! I've been a NIN fan for seven years. I'm 25 years old. I'm 6'5", athletic, short hair. I was in the Navy, and I'm about to start at Syracuse University in the fall studying computer graphics/animation. I'm about as clean-cut as you can get, and NIN are my favorite band.
As far as their audience being "little goth children," you are sadly mistaken. You can go to any concert by any band and say the same thing. Go see Garth Brooks and say "Man, look at all these little redneck children! I wonder how many of them are going to be abusive, wife-beating alcoholics in ten years!" The fact that there were a lot of young people in the crowd in no way, shape, or form should construe the band as "weird." To many of us you fucking right-wing asshole conservatives are "weird." We don't go around trying to get your goddamn Christian music off the airwaves -- we just don't listen to it. You, however, make it your mission in life to get anything that you don't agree with or understand off the air for the "good of society."
All I hear is Rush talking day after day about how the Republicans are the party of Freedom. In many respects they are -- that is, unless you happen to be gay, an outsider, enjoy pornography, a pot smoker, or [oppose them on] any other social or "moral" issue. The Right don't want the government telling them what to do with their guns or their land, but they sure as hell want the government making sure that nobody can read a Hustler or that a man can't fuck his boyfriend up the ass. The closest thing we have to a true freedom party in this country is the Libertarians. The Right wing is just as fucked up and corrupt as the Left wing.
If the best argument you can come up with is the fact that you saw some males wearing dresses, I have three words for you: J. Edgar Hoover.
Stick your head into alt.music.nin sometime and lurk for a while. You'll see about as many posts as get posted here, maybe more. You'll see a lot of interesting, intelligent people all clowning around, sharing information about nine inch nails, discussing what's on their minds. Many (if not most) are pursuing a college education. Basically, we're a completely normal and valuable segment of society that happens to find your view of the world a little fucked up. There's some shit about life that we JUST DON'T GET sometimes, and in the music of nine inch nails we find solace for that anguish. Whether we find consolation, redemption, or just a feeling similar to our own -- each person gets his own individual reaction, each likes the band for his own reasons.
I've heard Rush mention many, many times that he didn't start the conservative movement in America -- that there were all these people who thought the same way he did and they found a voice in him for their fears and frustrations. Well, we get EXACTLY the same reaction out of the music of Trent Reznor. So you can take your "Oooh, this is bad for society -- LET'S BAN IT!" attitude and shove it up your retentive conservative ass.
jim stark (htbt69d@prodigy.com):
...Christian fundamentalists, conservatives, right wingers, Republicans -- the main goal of these people seems to be to limit what I can choose from for stimulation. I'm referring to all forms of stimulation -- aural, visual, sexual...it makes no difference. I think it goes to the theory that if you limit the pool of available stimulation to "acceptable" forms, you create a greater society. That's a flawed theory.
This country was founded on the basis of a freedom fight. The Anglican Church threw the settlers over here over a difference of opinion. The Constitution was written to make sure no one person or sect could control the masses...look how fucked up THAT idea became. My point in all this disjointed rambling is that a strong society -- a good society -- DEPENDS on diversity. Homogenizing our culture only serves to stagnate it. We NEED things like homosexuality, racial and cultural diversity, country music, and nine inch nails. The future depends on Trent Reznor? Maybe not, but it certainly depends on me and about 25 million people like me. The young adults of today will rule the world in 20 years or so...and we like nine inch nails. Now what? You know, I just had another thought. All these middle-aged to older folks who are trying desperately to tell us how to be will need us in 20-25 years when they are too old and frail to help themselves. Why are they trying so hard to piss us off? Not a smart move, in my opinion.
kevin davis (aq978@yfn.ysu.edu):
From my point of view, we have to be careful about censoring things -- but everyone has a right to an opinion on anything and has the power to boycott or protest anything they see as offensive. Dollars speak louder than words -- and if Time Warner starts losing dollars in several areas due to stuff like this (satire or not), let them decide what they should do.
I personally don't like to hear about this type of material (satire or not) being produced, but parents should not depend on legislation to spawn morals on their children. That is their job. I would appreciate warning labels on stuff like that. I don't get what people have against warning labels. Warning labels are NOT censorship.
midnight tree bandit (wheyward@freenet.vcu.edu):
It's not the labels we're against so much as what they represent. Ten years ago, the Mothers of Prevention (as Frank Zappa called them, aka the Parents' Music Resource Center -- Tipper Gore and a consortium of Congressional wives) made an assault on the music industry, convincing their husbands to hold hearings on this "blight" on the cultural landscape. Their aim was not to get silly little labels put on records. It was to somehow force the industry to take stronger methods, such as an MPAA-style rating system or forcing record stores to keep records with "explicit lyrics" behind the counter or in a separate room. The hearings spooked the industry enough that they pre-empted threatened Congressional action by starting the sticker system. This satisfied Congress, and the matter was dropped.
These days, it seems, the only memory of Tipper Gore in those days is that she "led a group of concerned parents to get record companies to put stickers on records." Not surprising. We wouldn't want to remember that the wife of our Democratic vice president was acting like the Republicans have been acting lately, now do we? To get an idea of what the witch hunt was like, FZ preserved his testimony before Congress for posterity on his album Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Prevention.
So to me, who remembers this unpleasant time, those stickers remind us of when the record companies were forced to cave in before Congress, and a reminder that it could happen again next time someone wants to get Congress involved. We may not be so lucky as to get off with just a few stickers next time.
angela reid (celemon@email.unc.edu):
Seduction of the Innocents, anyone? So was born the Comics Code, which gradually has become more and more meaningless as more and more comic books go the "direct market" route. If I'm not mistaken (and I confess it was before my time), parental agitation resulted in the premature death of EC.
Pointless aside: When I was 14, I managed to get my mother to purchase Overnite Sensation for me. She had no idea, of course, what she was buying. She never knew. I seem to have overcome the psychological damage, however, and am doing quite well in graduate school, happily married, and have no arrests or even traffic tickets. (And I still have Overnite Sensation.)
buck satan (buck@dreamscape.com):
Well, the downward spiral sold a few million copies in the U.S. alone, so I wouldn't count on Time Warner ceasing production any time soon.
Listen folks, hearing bad words or looking at girly magazines DOES NOT instantly corrupt a child. What is the anal-retentive fascination that this country has with obscenity? For God's sake, in Britain they have topless women in the newspaper every morning, and we have a helluva lot more crime here than they do over there.
America -- the only country in the Western world where owning a full-auto assault rifle is considered acceptable but looking at a pair of tits or hearing the word "fuck" is inexcusable.
kevin davis (aq978@yfn.ysu.edu):
I'm not counting on anything, and you should do the same. There are probably four times as many bands that sold a few million records at one point in time and figuratively vanished off the face of the earth the next day.
...If a child is under the responsibility of a parent (this generally means being supported by and/or under the age of 18), and that parent has any desire to raise the child with any kind of responsibility, they should want to know what kind of stuff they are reading, listening to, etc. I don't mean monitor EVERY word, but have at least a general idea.
It's so ironic that so many people pooh-pooh any type of implication that music, books, and TV can negatively influence a child, but then blame a parent's behavior or handling of a child when that child grows up to be a mass murderer.
It is a hypocritical double standard. Things that go into the brain DO influence people. Some are more susceptible and impressionable than others. It is a parents' right to at the very least have a chance to counter what they see as a negative influence in their child's life.
buck satan (buck@dreamscape.com):
Yeah, but this comparison is ridiculous. The bands dropped off the face of the earth because a) the put out a crappy record and fans deserted them; b) they broke up; or c) they just sort of faded into oblivion by their own doing.... Record labels don't just drop bands for the hell of it, especially when they sell as many records as NIN. Besides, Trent Reznor is on his own record label, so I doubt sincerely that he's going to fire himself.
...I don't think that because Parent A decides he doesn't want his children hearing a particular band or watching a particular type of movie that Parent A has any right to get that type of medium banned.... How can you seriously BLAME music and movies?... I mean, come on. Like the parents who sued Ozzy Osbourne after their kid shot himself while listening to one of his records. Before that incident happened, that particular record had sold well over 10 million copies worldwide. Now two idiots blow off their heads with shotguns and it's OZZY'S fault? Come on -- if that had any merit, then millions of kids would have shot themselves. Having owned that particular Ozzy album for 11 or 12 years, I can say that I've never once had the urge to shoot myself from listening to it.
I'm not saying that music, TV, movies, etc. CAN'T have a detrimental effect on people. But trying to single them out as the sole scapegoat is just as fucked up a trying to blame Jeffrey Dahmer's parents for his outcome. Some people are just fucked up, and nothing anyone can do will change that.
...Music never killed anyone. Neither did a pair of tits, a porno flick, or a Hustler. I just find it funny that owning an instrument whose sole function is the taking of human life is considered a right, but wanting to watch a film in which two consenting adults fuck is the ruin of society. HUGE double standard, but hey -- this is the Right Wing we're talking about.
kevin davis (aq978@yfn.ysu.edu):
There's a WHOLE lot of ground covered in your huge general statement "they just sort of faded into oblivion by their own doing." This comment probably covers hundreds of different possibilities, each very different from each other. Any band or entertainer is very capable of doing this, no matter who they are. Nobody is immune to it, except a scant few like Elvis, the Beatles, etc., who live on because of decades of success.
A parent has the right to ASK for it to be banned. It is up to society as whole (including government) to judge whether or not the request is reasonable or there is an overwhelming consensus on the issue. I'm not passing any judgment here on any particular artists with these statements, including NIN. I'm just making a general statement whose validity would have to be examined on a case-by-case basis.
buck satan (buck@sam.dreamscape.com):
So since numerous polls have stated that most Americans would like to see assault weapons banned and tighter restrictions placed on handguns, then we should do both these things? At one time in America there would have been an overwhelming consensus that blacks shouldn't have rights and should remain slaves, or that women were incapable of voting -- should these institutions never have been put in place?... I ask you -- does the fact that society and government probably would have overwhelmingly supported the status quo in these two instances make it acceptable to have kept their existence? If the government and the majority of the people decided to repeal the Second Amendment, would you give up your guns?
...Look, there's a really easy way to keep up with what your kids are listening to -- GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS AND LISTEN TO IT! Jesus, is that so goddamn hard?
snow kettler (snowzor@aol.com):
Owning a gun is perfectly hunky-dory, but saying the word "fuck" is WRONG. Hmm, in all my years, I've never heard of anyone being killed by hearing, speaking, or even thinking the word "fuck." See the difference yet? (By the way -- why is it perfectly moral to kill an animal if you don't need it to eat?)
Many parents don't realize the responsibility a child is. A good parent teaches the child, through word AND example, what kind of behavior and beliefs are acceptable. If you do a good job and have solid logic, your child will turn out just fine. That doesn't mean he won't ever say the word "fuck," though. (Believe it or not, I know wonderful people who swear.) Anyway, warning labels are there. Use them or don't. But don't you dare try to limit my or anyone else's right to expression, artistic or otherwise.
You say the government puts obstacles in the way of raising a child? Why, freedom of speech? God forbid you child learns to THINK....
glitch 15:23 (pluto@comp-unltd.com):
...Since I'm tired of the "serious" Limbaugh/NIN posts, I thought I would post my humorous thoughts on it. This is a Top Ten List of songs by nine inch nails that (by titles at least) could have something to do with Rush:
TOP TEN NIN SONGS THAT RELATE TO RUSH
10. "the beauty of being numb" (I wouldn't get pissed at Rush anymore if I were)
9. "heresy" (no matter who says what in the battle of NIN v. Rush, both sides are attacking each others' "god")
8. "i do not want this" (i.e. censorship, Christian morals being pushed on the masses)
7. "march of the pigs" (can you say "Ditto"?)
6. "big man with a gun" (hell, the song that started the debate! OOPS! Sorry, I said "hell" on alt.fan.rush-limbaugh....)
5. "maybe just once" (Rush will loosen up?)
4. "something I can never have" (Rush talking about his sense of humor regarding satire)
3. "piggy" (self-explanatory)
2. "sin" (we NIN fans are swimming in it!)
1. "piggy" (that's too funny not to say twice)
I'm just having fun here; please don't take this too seriously. I'm pretty much a "live and let live" kinda guy, and I don't understand why others can't do something that you don't like (i.e. listen to NIN, be homosexual, eat feta cheese, whatever).
synergy (synergy@mcs.com):
NIN is one of my favorite bands. I'm in my mid-30s. I'm working on a second graduate degree. I earn a comfortable living and have never been a welfare leech. I'm a clean-cut, productive member of society. NIN would be my favorite band if Faith No More, Jane's Addiction, Ministry, etc. hadn't existed.
The funny thing is that much of the bumper music Rush uses on his show is done by bands who have also done music Rush would undoubtedly find objectionable. I don't share your hatred of Rush -- I find him to be entertaining and sometimes informative (I don't have the resources to dig up some of the interesting news he talks about on his shows) -- but I do think that his most useful function is to be a major-league pain in the neck for the Demmies, especially Porky Prez.
c-ko linde (ladycko@msn.fullfeed.com):
People who commit crimes due to a song, movie, or TV show generally have some untreated mental problems, drug problems, and/ or something else has made their life very unstable. Now, the "character" in the downward spiral commits suicide -- I don't know of any fan "copying" that, and some pretty depressed people find solace in NIN, myself included. Blaming the media for someone's problems is the easy way out -- point the finger at Trent Reznor, some singer on MTV, rather than looking at the entire picture.
The media do influence people, but by the time most kids reach the age when they can adequately make decisions, they also have learned to factor in many variables and to look at things in a balanced light.
For instance, I'm clinically depressed, and I take Prozac for it. Trent Reznor writes very depressing music. Did NIN make me depressed? NO.... Listening to NIN helps, in fact, because I can hear life through a fellow depressive's eyes, and sympathize. Plus, he is a great songwriter and musician.
kevin davis (aq978@yfn.ysu.edu):
"Blaming the media" is the easy way out, but blaming someone's problems on "mental problems, drug problems, and/or something else" is not? This is a double standard.
BOTH influence a person's life. My opinion is that it is the parents' responsibility to watch out for this -- be it drugs, music, TV, other authoritative figures in their lives, or what have you. I don't necessary think that total restriction or elimination of those things from a child's life is the best answer always, but the parents should have that opportunity -- as well as teaching about and countering those things that they feel are very negative influences in the child's life.
eric garbos (egarbos@dopey.sanders.lockheed.com):
Okay, here's some from another person jumping into the mix....
The word "fuck" in and of itself, like any word, has no meaning other than that which we (i.e., society, the people using it, etc.) give it. Without definition, a word means nothing.
There are also denotative (purely from definition) and connotative (from use and relation to other words/situations) aspects of a word.
"Fuck," means, denotatively, to fornicate. Not a particularly offensive thing. Connotatively, however, society has attached a great deal of negativity to the word. This comes primarily from the fact that it has usually been used in rude, derogatory ways. "Fuck off!" is a rude thing to say to someone. "I wanna fuck you" is less polite than "Let's make love."
That's why "fuck" is "bad." Now, why shouldn't you use it? Simple. As my mother used to say to me (she was full of clichés!), "One man's rights stop just short of the next man's nose." What that means is, you can do anything you damn well please, so long as it doesn't impinge on anyone else's right to the same. The issue with "fuck" is that people around you do NOT want to hear it. It may not mean anything to you to use it, but if THEY find it offensive, and you use it in their presence anyway, you are actively offending them. Unless you like offending people around you all the time (at which point I would dub thee "Ye Olde Asshole") you shouldn't use the word "fuck" around people who don't want to hear it.
Now, the problem in this particular situation is that a very large number of people (i.e., the better part of society) doesn't want to hear it. Therefore, whenever you use it, you are very likely to be offending someone. Yes, there are times where it's justified. Yes, sometimes you just NEED that offensive edge to get your feelings across. But the thing is not to use it wantonly, or willfully for the purpose of upsetting people. That's all. Other than that, feel free to scream