FINAL: The Rappers Speak Out

Recently since the Don Imus issue, there has been more focus on rappers and their degrading lyrics. Rappers have been stepping up to differentiate themselves from the, if not before definitely now, famed radio guy. Some of the justifications for rap’s lyrics have been the fact that unlike Imus, rappers are describing the neighborhoods and life they experienced growing up. MSNBC’s article on this subject said that some rappers have described rap lyrics as “…reflections of the violent, drug-plagued, hopeless environments that many rappers come from.” Rappers are urging complainers to take a stance and help change the reality the lyrics are describing.

Russell Simmons worries that the finger-pointing that Imus has done will fuel unnecessary censorship of music. Snoop Dogg’s response was that rappers are talking about money-hungry women in the slums that do anything to get money, whereas Imus was speaking about successful collegiate women who are trying to better themselves.

This is not to say that rappers should be let off the hook, but I do see the difference between rappers’ lyrics and what Imus said, especially when you look at the intention of the people speaking the words and whom they were referring to. Although Imus may not be aware of it, there have been women speaking out against rappers too. In 2004, the students of Spelman College in Atlanta, were upset over Nelly’s video “Tip Drill.” Nelly had turned to the school to ask for bone marrow donations for his sick sister. The students did not want to help without having Nelly lead a discussion about the video and how degrading the images were. The rapper however, refused.

The music industry is not ignoring this issue either, thanks to Imus’s comment about rap lyrics. A large group of music executives met in New York to discuss sexist rap lyrics, and their possible regulation. The meeting was called by Russell Simmons of the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network. Simmons also spoke on Oprah’s two-day town hall meeting for her show. He mentioned, “Whether it’s our sexism, our racism, our homophobia or our violence, the hip-hop community sometimes can be a good mirror of our dirt and sometimes the dirt we try to cover up” (USA Today Article).

Essence Magazine has also started a campaign called “Take Back the Music.” The site allows for opinions from both sides. One view I found interesting was that of Melyssa Ford, an ex-video model. She claims that her start in the business was to pay for tuition. I am not sure if I can relate to her reasoning, but she claims that she recognized that she was being exploited, so she decided to exploit herself, by making as much of a profit as possible off of her images. A rapper, Talib Kweli, stated a similar argument to what was mentioned in the MSNBC article, where he does not believe that rappers should be required to uphold society’s morals, but that it is more important to reveal the truth. Other rappers state that the women in the videos are there by choice, and if not in their video, the women would be in someone else’s video. I guess the choice is up to these women, but the audience for these videos should be considered. For example having “Tip Drill” air in the day is not a good idea. If rappers want to make these degrading videos, they should make sure that they are reaching appropriately aged audiences. The same should go for degrading lyrics, but I suppose there are already parental warnings on a lot of the CDs. I am not one to vote for censoring lyrics except for when they can be easily heard over the radio or on the television, where minors can access the content.

I agree with Sharpton “…airwaves should not be used to commercialize sexism and racism” (MTV article). Many rappers would respond that they are not promoting sexism or racism, but merely telling what they have observed in their communities. In this case, I would add that the airwaves should not even allow for observations told through lyrics that could imply the promotion of sexism or racism, because minors may misinterpret the lyrics. According to Parental Advisory Music Censorship In America, music fans tend to look past lyrics that go against their own morals (161). If this is true, then the above worry about youth hearing degrading lyrics is not a major concern. The problem is that in households where parents are not there to teach their children what is morally right, the children can turn to their favorite artists’ actions for advice. Perhaps a form of uncensored radio could be offered that allows for the uncensored lyrics to be heard by people over 18 years of age. On the Internet, or premium television channels, the artists should be allowed to express themselves. In a statement defending hip hop artists, Russell Simmons reminds the public that rapper’s “…messages are a mirror of what is right and wrong with society. Sometimes their observations or the way in which they choose to express their art may be uncomfortable for some to hear, but our job is not to censor or silence that expression” (Businesswire article). It is unfair to censor lyrics completely because they are offensive, but those offended should at least be able to avoid watching or hearing the content on regular television channels and over the radio. It seems that someone could always write a counter song against any lyrics in some of the more degrading rap songs that could also be shown or heard over the Internet, and many have.

The most bizarre argument from the Essence website was that the degrading videos help young girls. Russell Simmons claims that by watching degrading videos, young girls can learn about the mindset of the boys they are going to school with, and learn how to deal with them. Simmons fails to touch on the fact that young boys are also watching these videos, and seeing how these rappers are treating women.

Parental Advisory Music Censorship also mentions rap as a teaching instrument, a cultural history, and even comedy. It urges listeners and video viewers to look beyond the language and realize that “…rap is a wakeup call to mainstream America” (115). It is only a wakeup call when interpreted properly. When asked reasons why class members still listened to degrading rap, some mentioned only for the catchy music over the lyrics, which proves the earlier point about people ignoring lyrics that do not follow their own beliefs. Others mentioned that videos are comical. Maybe there is a point that could be argued that the shock value of these degrading videos makes the acts seem so ridiculous that they are funny. Viewers look on and wonder how anyone could think to show something so degrading, and the viewers are instantly aware of the problem of how women are treated in certain communities. Policing Pop mentions the fact that mainstream culture in America tends to be Eurocentric. This means that not all of America can relate to the problems in some of the inner city communities that many rappers rap about. The book goes on to mention “…even when these musics seem loud, raw, and unpleasant to Eurocentrics, they often provide the truest expressions of this young, polyglot culture” (235). Others in troubling communities can relate. The fear is that young viewers, who have not been told that the acts are to surface issues in certain communities, see the videos as insights to a favored rapper’s glamorous daily life.

To prevent this problem, degrading rap videos and songs could be made less accessible to minors. It would be hard to completely prevent the content from reaching the youth, but at least with the Internet, minors would have to search for the content rather than having it pushed at them by the radio or on popular regular television channels like BET. Hopefully this would prevent some misinterpretation by youth. There is obviously a large fan base for these rappers, considering the music sales, so it is hard to completely censor something that still has such a high demand. As far as the women depicted in the videos, that is their choice. The women are aware of the lyrics and the fact that they are being described in a negative manner, and they are not forced to be a part. At least here, the lyrics match up to the way the women are portrayed in the video with their provocative dancing. With the Imus issue, his comment has no relation to what he was describing. The sexist part of the comment may be frequently used by rappers, but not to describe well-educated athletes who did not choose to be a part of the commentary, and were not acting in a manner that implied what was said. The racist part of the comment is not found much in rap. There is also the important fact that Imus’s show can be heard by anyone tuning into the radio, where often degrading or sexist videos are shown late at night or over the Internet. Degrading rap could use some regulations as far as the audience it reaches, and Imus, although I think unintentionally, brought the issue to the front line.