posted on February 27, 2001 01:24:50 PM
Ok, this has been kicking around in my brain for awhile, and since it is an icky day outside and I'm stuck at the computer I thought I'd 'share'.
It seems that some people (both online and in the real world) think that because one has the "right of free speech", they can say anything they want without any consequences.
Here is my problem with that thinking:
Yes, the government (according to law) can NOT restrict 'free' speech. Ok, not a problem.
However, to my mind, that just doesn't stretch to, "NO ONE can restrict speech". The fact is *I* can tell someone in my home to shut up or get out, a brick and morter business can tell someone to shut up or get out, and (to take this into the online world) a web site OR online business can tell someone to shut up or get out. Now, if someone wants to keep saying what they were saying *somewhere else*, fine.
IF someone 'speaks up' they will face a consequence (my foot on their butt as I throw them out, suspension, ejection, ect). Why is it that people get SO upset when they get a slap on the hand for speaking out?
Some examples off the top of my head:
The Rocker situation (the baseball player): Yep, he can say whatever floats his boat. Hell, he can scream it from the rooftops. However, he *can* be fired from his job (as he is not employeed by the government), he *can* be fined by the leage (again, not a governmental agency).
Someone (and I swear I have NO specific poster in mind) can say, "AW/Ebay/Yahoo/Pick a site SUCKS". Yep, he/she can say (post) that. However, that poster can be suspended/warned/removed by any of the above mentioned sites.
I can stand in the middle of Walmart and scream that I *HATE* Walmart. Yep, I can do that all day long OR until Walmart calls security and removes me from the property.
My point is: Say whatever you want, after all it is your 'right'. However, expect consequences. When you weigh the consequences I think you will find that 'free' speech can cost you.
posted on February 27, 2001 01:40:08 PM
Actually, the government does have laws restricting "freedom of speech/expression". If there weren't, cross burnings wouldn't be illegal, fake bomb threats wouldn't get anyone's knickers twisted, repeatedly telling coworkers dirty jokes even after they ask you to stop, and you could yell "fire" in a crowded building with impunity.
Even so, you can still do and say those things(and a host of others) but you'd better be prepared to deal with the consequences of your words and deeds.
Sometimes it seems like those who holler loudest about their "right to free speech" are those who want to say whatever they please without any consequences whatsoever-which includes other people exercising their right to free speech by telling the person they think he/she is a fathead.
We are an inconsistent lot, aren't we?
Edited because I didn't proofread first.
[ edited by Shadowcat on Feb 27, 2001 01:43 PM ]
posted on February 27, 2001 01:42:55 PM
Here is another quick example before I have to go out:
A good friend of mine is in the Air Force. Now, he is NOT a fan of President Bush....not by a long shot. He *could* 'speak up' against Bush, he has every 'right'. However, if he does so he could (and probably would) lose his post as well as be court marsheled. So again, he could say whatever he wants BUT there are those pesky consequences. He has the right to say what he wants, but he could lose everything he has worked for. Doesn't seem like 'free' (i.e., without cost) speech to me.
posted on February 27, 2001 01:45:30 PM
S-kitty, you are of course correct about the fact that the government can restrict speech. I was going to mention that, but figured my post was crossing that "to long to read" line.
Now, I'm really late but will be back later to see what other folks think. Maybe I'm way off base here (hey, has to happen *some*time)
posted on February 27, 2001 04:00:31 PM
I don't believe in censorship. I do believe we should take responsibility for the things we say and pay the consequences if our words are hurtful.
Certain pop stars like Eminem spew forth nothing but hatred towards Women and towards the Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Transgender Community. Although I don't think it should be censored, I'd like to see people simply refuse to buy these kinds of records and stop buying into this kind of thinking. I would like to see it COST Eminem his record sales. But it disturbs me greatly that he has become such a huge celebrity. Are people really condoning this kind of hatred? I shudder to think.
By the way, I can't stand awards shows and I don't watch television - did Eminem perform with Elton John as I heard??? How is this possible? Did I miss something? Last I knew, Elton was a flaming.... well, you get my drift. How did THOSE TWO end up on the same stage together?? Was there a public apology first? Or did Elton just cover his ears and go on with the charade? Any info on this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
Rocker
posted on February 27, 2001 04:12:53 PM
toke - OH MY GOD. (Shaking my head)
NOW you know why I hate awards shows.
YUP let's grab that fame at ANY cost.
I am very sorry to hear Elton has no self respect and no sense of responsibility to "his" community.
I swear this is why I never made it to become a major rock star... I can not and will not kiss the @sses that need to be kissed.
And I wish I could remember who said this, but this is how I feel: "I would rather be hated for who I am than loved for who I am not."
Rocker
posted on February 27, 2001 05:00:45 PM
Why get worked up? Elton John's a whore, that's all there is to it. The Grammy Awards people are whores too. They pimped Eminem and Elton John to America, and Americans being stupid they swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker.
Although I don't think it should be censored, I'd like to see people simply refuse to buy these kinds of records and stop buying into this kind of thinking. I would like to see it COST Eminem his record sales. But it disturbs me greatly that he has become such a huge celebrity. Are people really condoning this kind of hatred?
I don't think they condone it. I think they're just too damn lazy to try to do anything about it. And anyway, even if they tried, they would likely meet with failure. I think everybody knows it, sees the futility in it, and decides the effort isn't worth it. Yeah, we have free speech here in America, but in the face of corporate and/or political might it amounts to zilch.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:14:24 PM
Unfortunately, some people interpret the First Amendment as meaning you can say whatever, whenever, wherever, about whomever you want, but that just isn't the case.
If so, there would be no slander and libel suits. Some of the rags, for example, have found that out.
I'm hoping the courts will let Eminem know that, if the suits filed by his wife and mother make it to court.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:20:00 PM
It bothers me that people give up the right of free speech out of fear (e.g. losing one's job) rather that out of a sense of responsibility and honor (For example, I feel I don't have a right to say anything I want when I am acting in my capacity of an employee, representing my company and getting PAID to act in a certain way).
Similarly, if I wanted to complain about a company, I wouldn't expect them to foot the bill for the costs associated with my complaining (e.g. standing in the middle of Walmart to protest rather than outside on the public street because it's cold outside). There is an air of dishonesty about that.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:34:01 PMIt bothers me that people give up the right of free speech out of fear (e.g. losing one's job) rather that out of a sense of responsibility and honor.
That is it!! That's what I've been trying to verbalise.....the idea of responsibility and honor AND the respect I have for those who know the consequence, yet 'put it on the line' anyway. I feel that the acknowledgement of courage of those who do that is being lost when some people throw around the idea of, "I can say whatever I want and you can't touch me."
Now, this is not to say that I don't think people who get slapped down for speaking up should NEVER question why they were slapped down NOR do I think that people who are silenced should not fight against that. Where would we be if the civil rights leaders didn't speak up both about their issues as well as the silencing of their issues?
That is why I tend to disagree with Spaz's statement that, "Yeah, we have free speech here in America, but in the face of corporate and/or political might it amounts to zilch."
About Eminem (who is a great example of folks wanting to 'shut him up' while realizing that doing so would start us down that slippery slope), does anyone have a link to where I could see his lyrics? I have to admit I've only heard two of his songs on the radio, and I'd kind of like to see what people are talking about.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:35:47 PM
High Five Femme! As usual, I agree with everything you say.
Spaz - WHY get worked up about it? (ohhhh don't get me started.....)
First of all, I have been in music my entire life and have been performing/working my @ss off for WELL over 20 years now. You better believe it PISSES ME OFF to see someone like Eminem become so "successful" (ugh) in all his negativity, while I am here freakin scrounging money to eat, am behind in my rent, and I - along with countless other struggling artists - would have a much more POSITIVE message to bring forth if given the chances he has been given. 'Scuse me if I sound bitter. (I AM!) Second, I don't give a rat's @ss about Elton bieng a "whore", YES, he and the whole music industry are nothing but a bunch of ...well, "fame mongering @ss kissing phonies" is how I choose to put it. However, I DO care that it is still "okay" to go around dissing the Queer community. If you replaced the word "Gay" (or the demeaning substitutes for that word)- every time you heard a derogatory remark in the media - with the word "African American", that kind of bigotry would NOT be tolerated, as it SHOULD NOT BE. So WHY is it still okay to demean women and the L/G/B/T community? That is my question - not to YOU Spaz - but to the guilty parties in our culture/society. So that is why I am worked up about it, and I am going to shut up now cos I could go on for hours.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:40:05 PMFuzzy: Your AF friend can say anything he wants about Bush, bad or good. He can participate in political campaigns and even in demonstrations, if he chooses. He just has to be out of the uniform at the time.
If he's wearing the uniform, he's considered to be representing the military. THEN he could run afoul of the UCMJ regs and be brought up on charges. However, the few times I've seen that happen(and what is said is WAY over the line in those instances), the most the person gets is a letter of counseling or reprimand. Usually, they're warned that if they want to pursue stuff like that, they have to do it out of uniform.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:48:57 PM
S-kitty: You are, again, correct. I was taking it to the extreme.
However, and I know you'd know more about this than I would, so correct me if I am wrong, the impression I got from my AF friend was that it was one of those 'things' that gets talked about. Someone who disagrees or has an axe to grind tells someone else (higher up) that so-and-so said such-and-such and so-and-so gets a kick in the butt.
Side note: I told him he can 'rent' my left hand. That way, when ever I give Bush the bird (which usually happens every time I see him on T.V.), the right handed bird is from me and the left handed one is from him.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:49:33 PMnycrocker...
Even here in "oh so liberal" Mass...gays are often expected to be complicit in the general hilarity over their sexuality. At least in the "antiques" community.
There are, however, places in the city where it might be somewhat risky to make some of those remarks...
posted on February 27, 2001 05:51:55 PM
Spaz - I don't think they condone it. I think they're just too damn lazy to try to do anything about it. And anyway, even if they tried, they would likely meet with failure. I think everybody knows it, sees the futility in it, and decides the effort isn't worth it.
I don't know Spaz. I think they condone it by buying it. And it is not futile. Lazy - yes maybe - maybe just not caring enough. But everyone has the power to change it by choosing NOT to buy the records. Lack of record sales would mean lack of dollars for that greedy corporate record company. Goodbye Eminem. This is not censorship, Eminem would still have the right to free speech, except he would have to spew it in his backyard to a couple stray dogs or anyone who would listen. THAT is paying the consequences of saying whatever you damn well please.
Lotsa fuzz - LOL Ok I guess I am exercising that right, huh? Apparantly I have not shut up yet!!
Rocker
It's all about marketing, not talent. A bunch of rich white fat cats in the music industry said to themselves one day, what large segment of society can we market to? Hmmm. How about we target ignorant, close-minded, homophobic, 18-24 year old misogynistic males who tend to think of themselves as rebels or as so-called bad boys? Do you know just how huge that demographic is? Let's find someone who can appeal to these morons, then stand back and watch the cash roll in.
Eminem isn't music, Rocker. He's an ad campaign. He's product. The message doesn't matter to those selling it. They'd sell "peace love and happiness" if they thought it'd connect with a big enough audience.
posted on February 27, 2001 05:55:51 PM
Just to add a slightly different slant on it - I have run into quite a few people who seem to think that their right to speech includes the right to an audience - that I don't have a right not to listen and walk away. Silly...
posted on February 27, 2001 06:00:59 PM
Spaz - ABSOLUTELY. Yes you and I are on the exact same page here. And THAT is my beef with the media, the corrupt record industry, etc. etc. The days of signing people like Mick Jagger and Tina Turner and Janis Joplin are long over. There is no more real talent, it is all a package, a product, a well thought out marketing technique. And they are up for ANYTHING that sells, even if it is selling HATRED.
Ya know what Spaz, that is why I gave up long ago on trying to get a record deal. I decided to produce my own music and go the indie route. I may not reach nearly as many people as I would had I gone the MTV route (UGH GAG) but - I can do my music MY way, it is MY ART, and no one can control it or change it or tell me how it has to be done. AND I have not kissed ONE A....
posted on February 27, 2001 06:09:53 PM
Since we're on the topic of Eminem, the thing that particularly bothers me is that he is specifically marketed to little kids. Spaz made reference to the 18-24 market -- his fans are 14 year olds. He's Donny Osmond.
Seeing all the Madonnas and the David Geffens applauding this guy who violates all the standards they claim to have -- it was just exactly like watching the Emperor's New Clothes play out on national television. All these dimbulbs going on about his sharp new suit. I kept waiting for the 'foolish' child to stand up and go "he's naked!".
posted on February 27, 2001 06:13:36 PMFuzzy: It can be used as a reason to zing someone or to get rid of someone considered a troublemaker. Usuall, though, it would have to be really bad for someone to be kicked out of the service.
But isn't that how it is in the real world, too? Often, people who speak out aren't fired from their jobs for speaking out but for some weaselly little thing.
Spaz & NYC: I'm curious. Have you ever listened to Eminem's words? I mean listen to the entire song/album/whatever rather than the sound bites offered up by groups opposed to him?
posted on February 27, 2001 08:27:39 PM
rocker is right, if people didn't buy that junk it wouldn't get made. My husband calls it "voting with his wallet".
posted on February 27, 2001 08:50:14 PM
Shadow my honest answer is NO I have not listened to any more of his lyrics. Once I heard the gay-bashing ones, I think it is clear why I refused to listen anymore. Ya know, if I just met someone, and they punched me in the face, I would not stick around to see or hear what other valuable qualities they might have. I learned all I needed to learn about this person and so I stay away, it's that simple. I was a Guns n Roses fan until I saw the RAPE art work. Yeah yeah they explained it was all part of a bigger picture, a bigger work of art, and it was, but so what? The rape scene (which shows a girl lying bloody in an alley with her clothes torn off, with graffitti on the wall that says "GUNS N ROSES WAS HERE" ) was selling on t-shirts all over NYC cos the young boys thought it was very funny & hip to wear. I never listened to Guns n Roses again and would never spend a dime on their sexist/misogynist records. Why would I give scum like that a second chance??
Rocker
[ edited by nycrocker on Feb 27, 2001 08:55 PM ]
Second, I don't give a rat's @ss about Elton bieng a "whore", YES, he and the whole music industry are nothing but a bunch of ...well, "fame mongering @ss kissing phonies" is how I choose to put it. However, I DO care that it is still "okay" to go around dissing the Queer community. If you replaced the word "Gay" (or the demeaning substitutes for that word)- every time you heard a derogatory remark in the media - with the word "African American", that kind of bigotry would NOT be tolerated, as it SHOULD NOT BE. So WHY is it still okay to demean women and the L/G/B/T community? That is my question - not to YOU Spaz - but to the guilty parties in our culture/society. So that is why I am worked up about it, and I am going to shut up now cos I could go on for hours.
