Hypocrisy?

Post by **peter** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:27 am

I'm probably prejudiced about this song coz I have to listen to it on a daily basis on the retail radio channel we have playing in the shop, but in the current atmosphere where even the slightest hint of 'objectification', 'cultural appropriation' or other non pc utterances can bring down the full weight of the thought police, are not the lyrics to Beyonce Knowles song Single Ladies (Put a ring on it) genuinely the most offensive and degrading output to grace the airwaves in many a year. The song is simply (from what I can tell) wrong on so many genuinely insulting to women levels, that it hurts. It suggests that women will sell their 'booty' for the single purpose of marriage and even refers to something (is it the sex act or simply the woman as a whole) as it! And this being belted out by a woman! ...... Or does this make it ok perhaps. Or am I simply getting the whole thing wrong?

Post by **Skyweir** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:47 pm

I havent heard it .. Ive heard of the band Hypocrisy, the death metal band but somehow I dont think this is what youre referring to.

TBH not hahahaha .. a typical retail shop ambience music.

Can you link the song .. Ill give it a listen and be happy to weigh in.

But from what youve already described it sounds awful actually, and ginormously stigmatising of women. Like women only have sex to snaffoo a marriage. FFS its not the 1800s where women were not able to own property and HAD to marry.

The fact that its belted out by a women is actually just sad.

Post by **Fist and Faith** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:48 pm

I only know the dozen or so words she says most often. But even I, who doesn't like her, and literally dosn't turned the radio on in my car, know the song. What rock have you been living under, Sky???

Post by **Skyweir** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:24 pm

A rock of my own making .. I even youtube searched it .. nada ..

I may have heard it but cannot recall it. What year was it released? And whos the singer?

Post by **wayfriend** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:36 pm

If by "thought police" you are referring to people who point out (but do not "arrest") other people who express ideas which reinforce unacceptable views ... then welcome to the thought police, Officer Peter.

I think "it" is a finger here. Sometimes a finger is just a finger.

(Song is saying, you had a good long chance to commit, and you couldn't, so don't expect to own me any more. I don't see any issues with that. What you think it says, I don't see it.)

Post by **Vraith** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:29 pm

wayfriend wrote:If by "thought police" you are referring to people who point out (but do not "arrest") other people who express ideas which reinforce unacceptable views ... then welcome to the thought police, Officer Peter.

I think "it" is a finger here. Sometimes a finger is just a finger.

(Song is saying, you had a good long chance to commit, and you couldn't, so don't expect to own me any more. I don't see any issues with that. What you think it says, I don't see it.)

Heh...funny! peter seems a bit grumpy.
But yea, it's about what you said, just a bit more attitude than that.

Post by **Skyweir** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:33 pm

And still no link lol

Post by **peter** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 5:25 am

Well, C' Mon - I did admit the possibility that I could be reading it wrong!

The lyric I was referring to runs (and it is a refrain throughout the song) "If you liked it then you should've put a ring on it. I concede the second 'it' refers to her finger but the first.......? Excuse me for a wry smile at thinking I detect a whiff of nievity in the air here. If I can suggest a quick visit to YouTube where the song and accompanying video are easily located (sorry Sky - I can't seem to link from my android tablet; there is no 'adress' display to pages and I have not the skills to locate them!) my point may seem (no guarantees

) a bit more valid. But ........ I defy any of you lot to listen to the thing three times a day for the next five years and not to become irritated with it!

But there is a bigger point here; I heard an interview with a coloured guy who was complaining about the different way in which the use of the N word was viewed by society depending upon the ethnic background of the user. He considered the word should be eschewed point blank. If the use of the word is bad - it's bad by anyone, black or white. If objectification of women is bad, it's bad by anyone, male or female. This may be simplistic, but it's surely a pretty good rule of thumb?

Post by **Skyweir** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:25 am

Oh is FF talking Single Ladies ... oh my god of course Ive heard Behonces ballad and had kids

So still no closer to hypocrisy lol

Post by **Skyweir** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:28 am

And at leaf I KNOW the correct song title lol

My son got into Sydney Dance School and Single Ladies was one of his audition dances

Post by **Skyweir** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:31 am

Oh confused are you talking about Beyonces Single Ladies

Theres no song titled Hypocrisy at all .. well that would explain why I havent found it

Post by **Fist and Faith** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:49 am

peter said "Beyonce Knowles song Single Ladies (Put a ring on it)" in the op.

Post by **Ur Dead** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:45 pm

My take is that she promotes marriage more than having the constant
one night stand. To men that if you really care for the women you would
marry her and not treat her like a hooker.
Which is true here in the US.

She had the snide detractors when she put the song and video out.

Post by **wayfriend** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 2:41 pm

Sky, don't make us LMGTFY on you.

Peter: If you liked our [exclusive] relationship then you should've put a ring on my finger. But, as you say, with attitude. (In the song she's clearly flirtatious, but she's talking to an ex who's being jealous.)

Post by **Vraith** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 4:49 pm

wayfriend wrote:
Peter: If you liked our [exclusive] relationship then you should've put a ring on my finger.

Yea. There is very clearly intentional sexual innuendo/implication in it.
But just as clearly, she's talking about the entire relationship previous and his sudden interest/jealousy at the change in circumstances.

And, peter, that has little to do with being irritated or not...I hate that thing as it is...I don't need the torturous addition of multiple hearings a day.

The larger point is something else, though...and I don't think I agree.
Words can and often do, as a matter of fact, have different meanings depending on multiple factors---one of which is who the speaker is. [[that's a sub-point of my larger disagreement with the idea/claim that an author/speakers intentions don't matter. It's one thing that huge swaths of Lit/Crit, and meaning-directed philosophy, and such for quite a long while now are mistaken about. Many other things those fields discuss make a lot more sense if they ditch that claim in its strong form.]]

Post by **peter** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:52 pm

It's a tricky one; I was brought up in a rural English farming world where the telling of jokes was an almost de rigeur part of being accepted into the male community. We all told jokes - and most of them were offensive to one group or another - but I give my word there was no malice intended to the group's who were the but of these jokes. In today's climate however, the telling of such jokes is a no-no. So if we told these jokes without bad intent was there no problem in the telling of them? If so why did they become off-limits? No - I think I agree with the fella - some things are just better off-limits all together. Holocaust jokes, the n word, and yes, gross objectification of people.

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:00 am

Oh fuck

I swear that wasnt there lol

Ok I just gotta stop skimming LOL

Question .. whats LMGTFY .. probably something really mean I guess

But clearly deserved

apologies all

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 7:08 am

peter wrote:It's a tricky one; I was brought up in a rural English farming world where the telling of jokes was an almost de rigeur part of being accepted into the male community. We all told jokes - and most of them were offensive to one group or another - but I give my word there was no malice intended to the group's who were the but of these jokes. In today's climate however, the telling of such jokes is a no-no. So if we told these jokes without bad intent was there no problem in the telling of them? If so why did they become off-limits? No - I think I agree with the fella - some things are just better off-limits all together. Holocaust jokes, the n word, and yes, gross objectification of people.

Pete, I swear you are the sweetest human to ever grace this earth

We are the same .. we make cracks as part of the course of almost everything. But not in malice .. AND a credit to your character or ANYONES is that they can tell the difference .. AND they can take as good as they give. If you are incapable are laughing at yourself then .. youre pretty much fucked in good society

So much is communicated tounge in cheek .. and accompanied with a cheeky wink.

All that other shit is just shit

Post by **wayfriend** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 1:50 pm

Skyweir wrote:Question .. whats LMGTFY .. probably something really mean I guess

If only you could see your irony right now.

Perhaps if I express my point this way ... https://i.imgur.com/Tsuru6p.png

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:01 pm

Smart arse

Well I had that coming .. geez you cant get away with being lazy anywhere. Sometimes you just .. cant be fucked

Kids and there coded acronystic lingo

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch

Hypocrisy?

Hypocrisy?