Is SPIN really circling the drain?

oh no I know I was just going from there, I didn't mean "yeah but you missed this" or anything

I have an academic friend who tried to unpack backpack hiphop. Bitch laid out all its contents - and discontents - on the ground in lieu of the oral part of her dissertation. (She prefers to be referred to as "bitch", by the way.) There was a lot in there, a lot to unpack. It was pretty tight, so she splintered her nails getting that stuff out in the open. But all in a good cause: unpacking. She found:

* The worn toothbrush of liberalism, which transmits to your gums the gingivitis of complacency.

* Three dead clouds.

* Sixteen human rights of unknown provenance.

* The college radio beermat of embarrassed social privilege.

* The off-white underwear of white self-doubt.

* A realistic Lorcin Engineering .380 semiautomatic which turned out to be a water pistol containing the semen of creativity.

I call her oral feat - which won her first class honors - "bitchsplainin'".

aero on the money. and he explains my problem with the spin thing perfectly.

ib cht

I just deconstructed the b-word for y'all

yr welcome

"Moronic" was definitely the wrong word in this context. There is, however, something about the conjunction of "back to basics hip hop" and "back to basics values" (the "lady" thing, "correcting" all the youth, not merely in society but also in hip hop)) combined with the focus on the rapper-as-prophet/voice of reason role that Lupe takes on here that provokes me to no end. So, again, while moronic was the wrong word to use, I can at least understand why he wanted to use it.

But the moment this becomes about whether white writers have the right to criticize hip hop because ultimately they're outsiders to "the culture" I believe we're on dangerous ground. Not that white writers don't have to think carefully about how they go about such things, but there's a line there I think. And when that particular argument is being made, we're all in trouble.

― insane in my mansplain (longneck), Saturday, August 25, 2012 4:23 AM (5 hours ago)

yeah, that's a fair point. this particular song and brandon's criticisms of it are something of a special case, though, because both lupe and brandon are criticizing not just hip hop, but language and attitudes in a specific culture - a culture that's larger than but linked with hip hop. it's not that anyone doesn't have the right to address this, but we should know that it's very sensitive territory. brandon doesn't seem to have approached with this in mind.

well it wasn't entirely NOT to do with this thread though i wouldn't have said anything if someone hadn't thought "what this thread full of dudes needs is ANOTHER DUDE PERSPECTIVE"

― lex pretend, Saturday, August 25, 2012 5:40 AM (3 hours ago)

well, it's all i can offer. even if i repost stuff written by others, i'm filtering it though my perspective. i am trying to be mindful and to speak only for myself.

nah i think that's one of the more facepalm parts of the song

sure, but then calling women "females" is just as cringeworthy as trying to sort them into ladies and bitches.

well maybe not just as...

No, every bit as. I loathe the use of the term "female" to refer to human beings. Have never understood why it gained currency, or why women put up with it.

yeah me too. I have some relatives that talk that way as like a military / cop thing and it's really creepy.

the words men use to describe women often seem to become popular because they're denigratory and gross, not in spite of it

the subject of the song isn't limited simply to "women", though. we could also say that the subject is language and culture, and race is unavoidably a part of that.

Arguing that a white person can't criticize the song's sexist attitudes because of race and culture is kind of like saying that outsiders shouldn't criticize the way that muslim fundamentalists treat women. Saying that it's part of the culture isn't a good defense.

yeah, but i'm not saying that anyone can't criticize anything. i'm saying that it's wise to be careful and respectful when criticizing certain things. some people are somewhat proprietary about what they consider theirs, often with good reason. there is no one to whom this advice applies more than white men.

well it wasn't entirely NOT to do with this thread though i wouldn't have said anything if someone hadn't thought "what this thread full of dudes needs is ANOTHER DUDE PERSPECTIVE"

― lex pretend, Saturday, August 25, 2012 7:40 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lex otm

― steven fucking tyler (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Saturday, August 25, 2012 7:40 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

uhh no he's not. My link was about a white male writing presumptuously about a conversation involving african americans. Kitwana was in a dialogue with & agreeing with women on twitter who were critical of Lupe, and was himself critical of Lupe's approach; but he made that tweet in respect to what they saw as Brandon's "cultural arrogance." By arguing that as a man he shouldn't way in you guys are avoiding the fact that Lupe's song is as much about race as it is gender

^^^

Lex's argument is positing that this is JUST a gender issue

and i mean "weigh in" not way in, obv

But the moment this becomes about whether white writers have the right to criticize hip hop because ultimately they're outsiders to "the culture" I believe we're on dangerous ground. Not that white writers don't have to think carefully about how they go about such things, but there's a line there I think. And when that particular argument is being made, we're all in trouble.

― insane in my mansplain (longneck), Saturday, August 25, 2012 4:23 AM (5 hours ago)

yeah, that's a fair point. this particular song and brandon's criticisms of it are something of a special case, though, because both lupe and brandon are criticizing not just hip hop, but language and attitudes in a specific culture - a culture that's larger than but linked with hip hop. it's not that anyone doesn't have the right to address this, but we should know that it's very sensitive territory. brandon doesn't seem to have approached with this in mind.

― i know your nuts hurt! who's laughing? (contenderizer), Saturday, August 25, 2012 11:40 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i kind of agree with this but you don't go far enough. As a critic there are times you HAVE to be strident & forceful. I think this comes down to less being sensitive & feeling like you're walking on thin ice all the time, than writing as precisely as possible, being able to back up what you say (these are basics for all writers), and most importantly, being very aware of the dynamics of the conflict you're about to embark on. Just as in the real world, you don't overcompensate by stammering & acting awkward & giving up your critical judgements or principles just because you are talking to a nonwhite person, but you also don't bombard them with condescension

lol @ the lessons for white ppl nature of that para. but it all comes down to 'be a decent person' end of day rlly

deejsplaining

being very aware of the dynamics of the conflict you're about to embark on.

this was horribly worded but i just slept 14 hrs & have been fighting off the flu so forgive me

deejsplaining

― jjjdoom (Whiney G. Weingarten), Saturday, August 25, 2012 3:56 PM (46 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

#BoycottILM

I think this comes down to less being sensitive & feeling like you're walking on thin ice all the time, than writing as precisely as possible, being able to back up what you say (these are basics for all writers), and most importantly, being very aware of the dynamics of the conflict you're about to embark on. Just as in the real world, you don't overcompensate by stammering & acting awkward & giving up your critical judgements or principles just because you are talking to a nonwhite person, but you also don't bombard them with condescension

lol @ "deejsplaining", but yeah, that's a good way to put it

I mean, it really should apply to life in general, whatever your situation

Lex's argument is positing that this is JUST a gender issue

it's gender & it's race & you're a white male explaining the terms of the debate about gender & race to people. lex is otm that what neither this thread nor any other thread needs is white males explaining the ins & outs of gender & race

well, except that as a white male, i find this kind of discussion personally useful. i'm not trying to set the terms for anyone else.

don't think deej is either

contenderizer is white?

don't think deej is either

then the surrogate he sent to the bar with me was a ruse...damn you deej you win again

i mean that deej is speaking mostly about etiquette for white guys weighing in on stuff like this, which seems appropriate

lex is not a white guy

i know, fair enough. if you think deej was out of line there, i'll leave it to him to defend himself.

i kind of agree with this but you don't go far enough. As a critic there are times you HAVE to be strident & forceful. I think this comes down to less being sensitive & feeling like you're walking on thin ice all the time, than writing as precisely as possible, being able to back up what you say (these are basics for all writers), and most importantly, being very aware of the dynamics of the conflict you're about to embark on. Just as in the real world, you don't overcompensate by stammering & acting awkward & giving up your critical judgements or principles just because you are talking to a nonwhite person, but you also don't bombard them with condescension.

I agree with this.

Lex is also british, not black, and not a part of the discussion that the tweet I linked was referring to.

Lex has decided the dynamics of gender justify the tonal arrogance of the piece. I linked to the perspective of an african american writer who disagreed and found the piece culturally arrogant. all ive said is that I thought as a critic one should be aware of these dynamics, and as a nonblack critic, when a prominent black intellectual checks u by saying your piece is "culturally arrogant," take a step back and think about why. You dont nec. need yo reconsider your conclusion even, but def your approach

To not yo (fucking swype)

The shittiness of the song justifies the tonal arrogance of the piece.

The opposing argument would say the lack of voices addressing the issue it presents means it should be handled carefully regardless of the shittiness of the song

i can't tell--does anyone think this song has redeeming qualities?

no one is qualified to offer that opinion

Dude Perspective would be an amazing name for a fictional rock star character in a Pynchon book

The opposing argument would say the lack of voices addressing the issue it presents means it should be handled carefully regardless of the shittiness of the song

The totally hamfisted and offensive way the song addresses the issue trumps any pat on the back Fiasco thinks he should get for effort. And if he really wants have a conversation he should welcome any voice to the debate and engage with them if he thinks they're wrong. Not just #boycott them and then sit back while his fans get all "how dare the jew attack our culture".

Its not about what lupe deserves, its about what the issue deserves

i can't tell--does anyone think this song has redeeming qualities?

― call all destroyer, Saturday, August 25, 2012 6:22 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i dont think anyone's even arguing about the song, more about the ~kerfluffle~

https://twitter.com/Brz0z0wski/status/239501855883935744

xp i know i'm just actually curious about that question

brainwasher likes it which is kind of freaking me out

i like the beat \o_O/

I was really hoping post-Lasers Lupe was going to go back to the shit I liked about The Cool but it seems like he has just taken that shit I liked and made it extra super stupid