Removing artists from your collection who have wildly differing or offensive views

[soulster]

Are there artists that you do not want in your music collection because you object to their political views?

I just found out about yet another artist who's music I really like and have in my collection, but whose political/religious/social views I cannot agree with or offends me. I'm even wondering about Smokey Robinson at this point.

Have you given any thought to this issue? How about you?

[splanky]

No, soulster, I don't do that, for the simple reason that I've always been able to separate the singer as a person, flawed
as all of us are, from the songs. Besides if many people knew exactly what a number of our so called stars were really like
as people it would break a lot of hearts and turn a lot of stomachs. It's always struck me as both sad and funny that
basically all of America attacked Ike Turner for his past treatment of Tina but I can think a number of legends in the biz
who behaved worse at times. I don't care if Smokey is now an al queda [[sic) supporter, I'll be bumping Swept For You Baby
from my grave.....

[soulster]

No, soulster, I don't do that, for the simple reason that I've always been able to separate the singer as a person, flawed
as all of us are, from the songs. Besides if many people knew exactly what a number of our so called stars were really like
as people it would break a lot of hearts and turn a lot of stomachs. It's always struck me as both sad and funny that
basically all of America attacked Ike Turner for his past treatment of Tina but I can think a number of legends in the biz
who behaved worse at times. I don't care if Smokey is now an al queda [[sic) supporter, I'll be bumping Swept For You Baby
from my grave.....

How about when someone publically comes out and gets very offensive? What if someone like, oh, uh, like Diana Ross came out as a birther? What if, say, someone came out as anti-Jew, andi-Muslim, anti gay, a wife-beater, or was arrested for being a child molester, and there was undeniable evidence? Could you be comfortable with those artists in your collection, no matter how you say you can separate the person from the music, or that you ignore anything anyone says or does?

[splanky]

Okay,soulster, in many cases like you mentioned I know I wouldn't go out and continue to support those artists but the stuff I already have in my collection I have because I wanted it. Child molesters I would have a problem with but all my
life I've had friends and relatives with all kinds of prejudices, some blatant racists, some anti-semetic, and even a cousin who was indeed a wife beater but I didn't ignore their flaws, nor did I discard them completely unless it became absolutely necessary. Some changed for the better with time, some still are as hateful. That's life. If Bootsy Collins
started doing benefits for the Klu Klux Klan I'd simply say, okay, anyone can lose their mind but it doesn't erase all the joy
Bootsy already given me. Dang, cous, what set you off on this tangent?...

[soulster]

Dang, cous, what set you off on this tangent?...

With the last few threads I have started, I am trying to generate some real discussion about things that matter around here. The topic is about artists, but it's really about tolerance, prejudice, and other things. I started a thread on interracial dating, and I mentioned why I started it. No one here wants to get into it. I have a feeling that, while some of us have no problem with it, others do, and don't want to talk about it.

I want to start a music-related thread on doing needledrops of old records, but if I did that, then the only people who would post are those complaining that no one here is interested in "audiophile" stuff. Then, I log on here and see more threads about that same damn female Motown group from the 60s.

I wanted to do a thread about Windows 8. It would probably sink like an anvil. I once started a thread about the age demographics and I think Ralph removed it. I guess age topics are taboo around here.

[Jerry Oz]

I recently read where the lead singer of the Beach Boys had very derogatory thing to say about the president. I have had several opportunities to listen to their greatest hits since then, but purposely chose not to. Also, I heard that John Mellencamp ranted about how it was wrong for the federal government to provide help to New Orleans after Katrina [[and got loudly booed) in a concert. John Mellencamp is beyond a doubt one of my favorite rock artists, but I have no interest in listening to anything he does until his rant is no longer fresh on my brain.

In general, the least I know about the political views of celebrities, the better. Hearing the far right bleating of James Woods and Dennis Miller has led me to turning off talk shows when they come out. But to be truthful, I wouldn't care for them if they were more progressive, either. So, yes; the views of artists most definitely affect whether I choose to listen to or support them.

[soulster]

What did Mellencamp say about Katrina? I can't find anything on the 'net. I'm investigating the BB singer now...

EDIT: I just read ab out what Bruce Johnston said. he's a republican, that's for sure, but he wasn't vile about Obama, at least in the way Pat Boone and Ted Nugent have been. And, FWIW, he hates Romney too. I chalk it up to him being another old white man who is afraid of change, and watches too much Fox news.

[Jerry Oz]

A local radio personality reported having seen Mellencamp in concert and he went on a rip against providing assistance to New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. To hear the reporter's version of events, most people in the crowd began booing him after the statement. In hindsight, I wonder if he wasn't upset that emergency relief was flowing in when he'd been campaigning for years to help the American farmers with little assistance from the government? I'm going to dig into that one myself. I'm actually hoping not to find anything.

As for Johnston, all I really needed to know was this to turn me off:
“Obama’s an a—-le,” the musician declares to a fan looking for a photo opportunity. “Unless you’re interested in never having any money and being socialized.”He also warns of what will happen if our President doesn’t face re-election pressure: “Wait ’til Obama doesn’t have to try anymore. You’re f—ed.”

[soulster]

As for Johnston, all I really needed to know was this to turn me off:
“Obama’s an a—-le,” the musician declares to a fan looking for a photo opportunity. “Unless you’re interested in never having any money and being socialized.”He also warns of what will happen if our President doesn’t face re-election pressure: “Wait ’til Obama doesn’t have to try anymore. You’re f—ed.”

Yeah, I found that.

Well, I don't have a problem if someone calls Obama an asshole. He called Romney one too. Some people think Obama is a socialist, but think about it: there isn't anything inherently wrong with socialism, and it's not exactly an insult, except to conservatives. Johnston's just misguided and is full of fear, just like a lot of older white people out there.

What does offend me is when they start insulting Obama's family, hint that he should be shot, insult his intelligence, question his education or his place of birth/citizenship, faith, or use racial epithets and images against him, or anyone. Those are the kind of things that will cause me to remove an artist's music from my home. Hanging out with tea-baggers is very close to fraternizing with racists, which is what most tea-baggers are. They simply cannot accept than a person of color is the President of the United States of America. I do not call myself a christian anymore because of all the religious people who are also sexist, racist, tea-baggers, intolerant of anyone who holds different views, or has a different lifestyle than they do. there are a LOT of artists out there, and I want to identify them all.

[robb_k]

How about when someone publically comes out and gets very offensive? What if someone like, oh, uh, like Diana Ross came out as a birther? What if, say, someone came out as anti-Jew, andi-Muslim, anti gay, a wife-beater, or was arrested for being a child molester, and there was undeniable evidence? Could you be comfortable with those artists in your collection, no matter how you say you can separate the person from the music, or that you ignore anything anyone says or does?

I am Jewish, and more importantly, a person who is against people hurting others and preaching hate or putting down or belittling others. Yet. I can appreciate the art created by such people. Tortured souls often have catharsis in artistic expression.

I still appreciate good acting from Mel Gibson [[in his early Australian films), despite disagreeing strongly with his views on social issues, "race and creed" issues and his publicised interpersonal actions [[which appear [[on the surface) to be selfish, childish, sexist and racist).

[roger]

Here is my two-pence worth ..

I've never really understood why a musician's political views/personal lifestyle should impact on anyones enjoyment [[or otherwise) of their music. I can understand that such issues might put off someone going to see a particular artist in concert as that is a lot more "personal" an experience.

I suppose to me music is essentially "impersonal" .. most of the recordings I have in my collection are by people about whom I know nothing .. since an early age I would tend to buy records "blind" based on the fact it was "produced by Van McCoy/Thom Bell/HDH etc. etc. etc." or was by someone who I already had a number of records by .. otherwise if I heard something I liked on the Radio or in a Club I would track it down and get a copy .. the last thing that would ever cross my mind would be to investigate the lifestyle and beliefs of the artist involved!!

There are some recordings that I have no interest in listening to due to their lyrical content but that is a different matter as far as I can see.

In my collection I know I have a lot of records where the headline act has/had a disreputable lifestyle .. varying from Fraud or just being a nasty person through to Murder, Wife-Beating and drug-dealing. I don't really approve of habitual drug-taking but if I were to include this in my list of no-nos I suspect a VERY high proportion of recordings would be by "disreputable" people.

And note I said "headline act" in the previous statement .. if I listen to something like "Didn't You Know You'd Have To Cry Sometime" by GLADYS KNIGHT & THE PIPS I don't consider myself to just be listening to Miss Knight .. I am also listening to the background vocals of her group .. plus ASHFORD & SIMPSON as songwriters .. plus those Motown session musicians. Let's just say a prominent session musician at Motown [[or Stax, Sigma etc. etc. etc. ) is found to have led a vile lifestyle .. operating torture chambers in his basement or running a child-porn operation or similar .. does that mean that everything he ever played on becomes "tainted"? To me it makes no sense to simply single out the headline-act.

Roger

[Hotspurman]

I’ve always liked what music I like because I like it, not because I approve or disapprove of the artist and their beliefs. If I was to remove from my collection all of the music made by artists whose beliefs I disagree with, I wouldn’t have much music left to listen too!

As you can imagine, there was a concerted campaign in Britain to get Gary Glitter removed from every radio playlist, since playing his records gave him royalty income and made it easier for him to journey the world following his particular sexual tastes. Now I don’t agree at all with his particular predilections, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to re-write my own history and stop liking ‘Rock & Roll Part 2’, ‘I Didn’t Know I Loved You [[Til I Saw You Rock & Roll)’ or ‘Makes You Blind’ just to please somebody else and their moral crusade.

Similarly, having worked in the record industry for a good many years, there are numerous artists who I consider to be out and out racists, and I’m also talking about Jamaican and African American artists who positively loathed white people and made it quite plain they were less than comfortable with me working on their records. I’ll continue listening to their music, if I like it, but I certainly wouldn’t have them on my ‘must have dinner sometime’ list. I don’t agree with murder but I’ve not removed Zapp from my ipod, nor am I likely too...

[Jerry Oz]

It's a compelling topic and one that has me evaluating my personal views. I know people who have a wide range of personal views, many that are far, far away politically from my own. Many of these folks would go to the wall to support me if I needed them to and I would help them in any way that I can. In fact, we get into fun [[and sometimes heated) debate over our differences, but we still appreciate each other beyond our differences. Yet, I find myself holding artists to another standard. I know it's wrong, but I don't want to hear their political views. Entertain me if you can; that's enough. Maybe I'll get over it when the vitriol goes out of the mainstream. It just seems more vile and personal than it used to and I'm taken aback to an extent.

[timmyfunk]

I've been lucky in that regard. Most of the performers who politics I can't stand aren't in my collection anyway, and probably never will be. Ted Nugent, the Beach Boys, performers like Charlie Sheen, Dennis Miller, etc.. They can all go to hell as far as I'm concerned. The true colors of a lot of celebrities came out in volumes after Obama was elected.

[carlo]

I'm even wondering about Smokey Robinson at this point.

What's up with Smokey?

[antceleb12]

In regards to Ike Turner, how can anyone expect people to NOT jump on his case? The people who jump on his case, but disregard other people's problems are being hypocritical. For example, it is rumored [[I don't know much about how true this was) that John Lennon used to beat women. If this was true, I would lose basically all respect I had for him. But, I know that regardless of how big of a deal the media came out with it, he would still get millions of backing because his music and contribution is legendary. Personally, if this was true, I would discard all of his music because I would feel guilty. With Ike, the only recordings I own are those with Tina. And even then, it's hard for me to listen to them without at least the thought passing into my mind that this man beat her. There are plenty of artists who have issues or views that I would strongly disagree with, but I don't know about. If I don't know about it, there's nothing for me to dislike, but if they come out with it I might have an issue.

Another example is when Natalie Cole made some snide remark about how Amy Winehouse didn't deserve her Grammys because of her drug issues. I was greatly angered by this, as 1) The Grammys award musical contribution, not how you conduct your personal life and 2) it is public knowledge that Natalie suffered from drug addiction. So why she was getting on the pulpit about Amy's problems turned me off from listening to her music [[which I greatly enjoy) for a good while. I listen to her again now, but it took me a while to forget about it.

[soulster]

What's up with Smokey?

He's moved to the far-right, probably due to his religion.

[tamla617]

what kind of far right have you guys got?

in ther uk the far right are a bunch of neo facists.national front/british national party

[Ngroove]

Closest example I would say have done such a removal with my collection; was, believe-it-or-not, Hannah Montana, hahaha! Yes, even I barely am partially mentioning this in shame as I am posting this.

Honestly, I have loved the first season of Miley Cyrus' show; was fun, with some catchy tunes, enough to buy to buy the soundtrack, to listen it twice before realizing the novelty. But in time, while further seasons country-fried it, Miley herself, at such a still too young an age to present, let alone behave herself as such, is just doing too much dirt to feed celebrity-Hollywood-tabloids-Perez Hilton, even today, a dangerously potential future Britney Spears-Lindsay Lohan in the making.

Otherwise, am aware Michael Jackson was a Jehovah's witness; Isaac Hayes was a Scientologist; Jermaine Stewart, might have been a homosexual; did not stop me from listening to their music, appreciating them as people in general. Although, from what I've learned from an episode of Unsung; Rene Moore might have struck Angela Winbush. Still listen to "I'll Be Good" in all groovy enthusiasm, but that's still pretty darn ugly.

[soulster]

what kind of far right have you guys got?

in ther uk the far right are a bunch of neo facists.national front/british national party

Here, the far-right are what we call christian evangelicals, neo-conservatives, tea-baggers/birthers, neo-nazis, and the NRA. They all feed off of each other.

Otherwise, am aware Michael Jackson was a Jehovah's witness; Isaac Hayes was a Scientologist; Jermaine Stewart, might have been a homosexual; did not stop me from listening to their music, appreciating them as people in general. Although, from what I've learned from an episode of Unsung; Rene Moore might have struck Angela Winbush. Still listen to "I'll Be Good" in all groovy enthusiasm, but that's still pretty darn ugly.

Ever since the Jerry Sandusky thing, I have been rethinking the allegations against Michael Jackson being a pedophile, and I am convinced he was one, but I honestly do not think he got as far as actually molesting anyone, but I think he tried.

[Ngroove]

Ever since the Jerry Sandusky thing, I have been rethinking the allegations against Michael Jackson being a pedophile, and I am convinced he was one, but I honestly do not think he got as far as actually molesting anyone, but I think he tried.

No proof = he didn't do it - although some people of my church, around the time of his second trial, thought he did, and spoke down as if he is a horrible person.

[soulster]

No proof = he didn't do it - although some people of my church, around the time of his second trial, thought he did, and spoke down as if he is a horrible person.

There's also no proof that Jerry Sandusky violently anal-raped a 10-year-old kid in the shower, but, can you honestly tell me you don't believe he did?

[Ngroove]

There's also no proof that Jerry Sandusky violently anal-raped a 10-year-old kid in the shower, but, can you honestly tell me you don't believe he did?

Not sure really.

Also, around the same time, there was an MJ documentary on television, that told a great, in-depth in the Jacksons' professional, and personal life. Learned things like how hard their pop pushed them, that MJ hardly had a childhood at all, to even details like the older brothers, even pop, had groupies, and well, MJ and Marlon [[the other younger sibling, right?) hid behind the covers, perhaps even a little peeking, while the rest had action, the same room. Further going on, learned of MJ's designments of his and his folk's house he bought with "Off the Wall" success money, to Neverland Ranch, to make up for his lost childhood.

Really made me pity his side, and I just remembered, I did remove / self-boycott listening to J5 music for a while, comparing to what had been done to them to make them, with sweat shop children.

[Ngroove]

Bump........

[chidrummer]

"it is rumored [[I don't know much about how true this was) that John Lennon used to beat women. If this was true, I would lose basically all respect I had for him. But, I know that regardless of how big of a deal the media came out with it, he would still get millions of backing because his music and contribution is legendary. Personally, if this was true, I would discard all of his music because I would feel guilty."

Well I hate to burst your bubble, antceleb, but Lennon admitted to beating women early in his adult life. He was quite apologetic about it and knew this was not his best self, but to his credit, he never ran away from it. The lines in the middle eight of McCartney's, Getting Better was actually John's contribution, "I used to be cruel to my woman, I beat her and kept apart from the things that she loved. Man, I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

I really can't say that an artist's personal life greatly influences whether I will buy or continue to buy their product. For me, that's a case by case evaluation with no roots in logic or consistency at all. I'm not one of those people who has to believe that someone has to "live the song that their singing about". There are far too many examples of great songs with great performances that come straight from the singer's imagination and not their direct experience.

[antceleb12]

Well I hate to burst your bubble, antceleb, but Lennon admitted to beating women early in his adult life. He was quite apologetic about it and knew this was not his best self, but to his credit, he never ran away from it. The lines in the middle eight of McCartney's, Getting Better was actually John's contribution, "I used to be cruel to my woman, I beat her and kept apart from the things that she loved. Man, I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Personally, I would have to do some research as to whether or not he was like that his entire life. What's important is if his ways changed and if he ever made amends for the women he hurt. I don't listen to Lennon's music [[nor the Beatles) hardly at all, so giving up his music would not be hard at all.

However, if I was a true fan, I would probably stop listening to his music. I can support an artist even if we have opposing views to some things, but there are others I can't tolerate - no matter how highly regarded they are by society.

[tamla617]

i either like the music or i dont.with no thought to who or what they are or are not,to be honest

[Jerry Oz]

I rented a movie once and when I took it home, I found out it was by Roman Polanski. I never watched it. I don't care about personal lives from the extent of who they date, their sexual orientation, where they're from, what their family members have been quoted to say in the media, etc., but there are circumstances that arise that affect whether I want to support artists and in those cases, I choose not to. It doesn't amount to a hill of beans to them, but it matters a lot to me.

[soulster]

The truth is that every single artist we love or don't love have done things that were unethical or immoral. Almost all of them have done drugs, hold, or did hold repugnant political or social views, or committed a criminal act. One would have to throw out most of their music collection if they knew about their favorite artists. Even Smokey Robinson was once a crackhead by his own admission!

The thing is that we all must decide for ourselves what we can and can't tolerate. To the guy who has no problem not listening to John Lennon because he allegedly beat his first wife, do you have any problem with having Lou Rawls or James Brown in your collection? They did the same thing.

I do not condone spousal abuse, but so many people we know in real life have done it and we haven't broken off ties to them.

And, some people do change!

[antceleb12]

The truth is that every single artist we love or don't love have done things that were unethical or immoral. Almost all of them have done drugs, hold, or did hold repugnant political or social views, or committed a criminal act. One would have to throw out most of their music collection if they knew about their favorite artists. Even Smokey Robinson was once a crackhead by his own admission!

The thing is that we all must decide for ourselves what we can and can't tolerate. To the guy who has no problem not listening to John Lennon because he allegedly beat his first wife, do you have any problem with having Lou Rawls or James Brown in your collection? They did the same thing.

Yes. I don't have either in my collection.

[paladin]

The truth is that every single artist we love or don't love have done things that were unethical or immoral. Almost all of them have done drugs, hold, or did hold repugnant political or social views, or committed a criminal act. One would have to throw out most of their music collection if they knew about their favorite artists.

I always find your posts quite interesting, yet skewed, you always ask a question and hold your answer in abatement depending upon how people answer. Your statement above is your truth and your way of looking at things, no more or less.

I think that Robb K's answer among others was succinct enough. I am sure there are many artists who lead less than stellar lives and with the media being what it is today, if they are doing something wrong or immoral it'll come out, It may effect how one reacts to future recordings or purchases but I tend to doubt that it would have any reverse effect on what you liked before you knew the details but everyone is different so theres bound to be some folk who are effected. ......... Its the human condition...recording artists, movie stars, most in the public eye have to be careful, but as the recent case in Pennsylvania indicates , immoral or illegal activity is not confined to any one profession or group of people, there's enough sick shhh going on for everyone on the planet.

[soulster]

I always find your posts quite interesting, yet skewed, you always ask a question and hold your answer in abatement depending upon how people answer. Your statement above is your truth and your way of looking at things, no more or less.

I have never claimed my posts were any more than my perspective.

[144man]

I rented a movie once and when I took it home, I found out it was by Roman Polanski. I never watched it. I don't care about personal lives from the extent of who they date, their sexual orientation, where they're from, what their family members have been quoted to say in the media, etc., but there are circumstances that arise that affect whether I want to support artists and in those cases, I choose not to. It doesn't amount to a hill of beans to them, but it matters a lot to me.

I could stop listening to Phil Spector's productions because he is a convicted murderer, but why should I take it out on the Crystals, the Ronettes etc? In the same way all the other people involved in Roman Polanski's movies share no responsibility for what he did.

[Jerry Oz]

I could stop listening to Phil Spector's productions because he is a convicted murderer, but why should I take it out on the Crystals, the Ronettes etc? In the same way all the other people involved in Roman Polanski's movies share no responsibility for what he did.

I have no problem listening to Phil Spector's productions. If he were to return to producing records today, I wouldn't care for anything that he did. I'm not saying that I am naive enough to think there is anybody with no skeletons in their closet. Lord knows that I've got some... I just would rather not know about some of the skeletons, which I think are worse than others.

[soulster]

I could stop listening to Phil Spector's productions because he is a convicted murderer, but why should I take it out on the Crystals, the Ronettes etc? In the same way all the other people involved in Roman Polanski's movies share no responsibility for what he did.

For real! One would have to give up listening to a lot of classic rock. Jim Gordon, the drummer who hacked his mother to death, played on an awful lot of records.

[copley]

In my record collection I have murderers, rapists, thieves, wife beaters, cheats, drug dealers, homophobes, racists, substance abusers, self harmers, drunks etc! For me it's what's in the grooves that counts!

[splanky]

In my record collection I have murderers, rapists, thieves, wife beaters, cheats, drug dealers, homophobes, racists, substance abusers, self harmers, drunks etc! For me it's what's in the grooves that counts!

I guess it all boils down to a question of whether a person can admire and appreciate the talents and skills of another who is far from perfect as a human being, because all of us are. And really too I think
some people are confusing the time of a person with the kind of a person when in reality many of have
said and done things in the past we'd like to forget. In that way it's truly only the continually un-repentant that concern me. This is an interesting but still sensitive subject because I know there are
lots of people, actually most of the people who would call themselves "fans" of any particular artist,
whatever the media, who simply cannot stomach the truth about any negative aspects of their idols
past life, beliefs or behavoir. I , myself am not totally immune to being iritated, in fact right now I'm having a big problem with Will and Jada Pinkett Smith who apparently have allowed their daughter
Willow to get her tongue pierced. The kid is 11 years old. WTF?...I'd like to see Men In Black 3 but it's
going to take me a bit to be able to look at Will Smith's mug and not think...
you know what I mean...
BTW, the logon link appears to broken for the forum, could somebody contact Ralph and Lowell...

[144man]

BTW, the logon link appears to broken for the forum, could somebody contact Ralph and Lowell...

I'm having the same problem. Westgrandboulevard has emailed SDF but hasn't had a reply yet.

[144man]

I've been thinking about this a bit more. If you still like the music, but get rid of the records from your collection, the only person you're punishing is yourself. It might make you feel better in the short-term, but it's basically a holier-than-thou attitude.

[splanky]

I've been thinking about this a bit more. If you still like the music, but get rid of the records from your collection, the only person you're punishing is yourself. It might make you feel better in the short-term, but it's basically a holier-than-thou attitude.

I have to totally agree with you, 144. I have some very hard and still felt justified grudges with some folks in my own
life but I was struck by some quote I read in a book recently:
Carrying resentment around is like drinking poison and expecting someone else to die..
I'm trying to drink less of my own everyday...

[soulster]

I've been thinking about this a bit more. If you still like the music, but get rid of the records from your collection, the only person you're punishing is yourself. It might make you feel better in the short-term, but it's basically a holier-than-thou attitude.

I disagree. I used to think the same way you do, but each of us has a personal moral and ethical code. I never go against mine and I can sleep at night.

[144man]

I disagree. I used to think the same way you do, but each of us has a personal moral and ethical code. I never go against mine and I can sleep at night.

I have a personal and moral code as well, but I can also take a pragmatic view. If I disagree with Smokey Robinson's political beliefs, I can refuse to buy his future releases thus having the practical effect of depriving him of royalties. The records I already have are a fait accompli, and getting rid of them isn't going to make any difference to him at all. I have no responsibility for his actions, so why should it affect whether I sleep at night?

[paladin]

I have never claimed my posts were any more than my perspective.

I disagree. I used to think the same way you do, but each of us has a personal moral and ethical code. I never go against mine and I can sleep at night.

"Perspective" ? Perspective "Really ? "......I understand but you are avoiding the content of my post. Most of the folk who post here have a realistic topic for discussion and post their opinion, position etc, up front and wait for a response. Your posts are basically bait and switch depending upon the feedback, in other words, like your quote above you used to feel a certain way now you don't. You have issues with certain artists behaving badly and after you get a response we finally get down to the real subject, that is whenever you make your big reveal as to the true nature of the post.

Let me clarify further, I happen to like the Temptations, yet I, like everyone else here knows that David Ruffin, although a superlative singer and performer was a less than desirable person, band mate, father and husband. As time passed the information that was revealed really didn't hamper my enjoyment of the records that he made famous. Although I understood the many issues he had, If I wanted to discuss them on the forum, I'd simply ask the members how they felt about his personal life, cause and effect etc. I put that out and up front so that the folks here clearly understand where I was coming from. Because thats exactly what I want to talk about.

The truth is that every single artist we love or don't love have done things that were unethical or immoral. Almost all of them have done drugs, hold, or did hold repugnant political or social views, or committed a criminal act. One would have to throw out most of their music collection if they knew about their favorite artists.

My other point was that you self righteously condemned all the artists that" we know and love or don't love",[[ that's a real mouthful) without any degree of specificity, because it would be impossible for you to make such a statement without all of us responding in kind to your assumption. Which we both know won't happen.

This thread has went from you venting your opinion to you professing that you can sleep at night because of your moral or ethical code. I can't recall anyone asking a question that required that particular answer. But that's just me..........young folks who do remixes today, have a way of describing their "mix" attempts as being chopped and screwed and thats exactly how I see your posts......chopped and screwed.......or in other words, you got a lot of yin & yang going on in your head my friend...........

[splanky]

I disagree. I used to think the same way you do, but each of us has a personal moral and ethical code. I never go against mine and I can sleep at night.

Please!....
Are you trying to say everyone on this thread other you flip flops on their own beliefs?
I don't think most here would have encouraged negative behavoir by any one of their favorites had
they known them but we can't make people think or act as we do or erase anybody's past...
Talk about holier than thou...

And I live with myself just fine...

[tamla617]

i'd be getting in a right mess with my records if i had to keep reviewing the state of mind and politics of the artists i have in my collection [[s)

just take the beatles
john would be out for his views on politics
paul for his veggie and not wearing leather whinging
george for making "that record" that was plagerised [[sp) from the chiffon's "he's so fine"
ringo would be out anyway for being ringo the "drummer"
and all of them for advertising drug use
but i dont stop listening to sgt peppers etc.and i wont
i'm taking it that the dead count in this thread?
there wouldnt be many i'd have if i expected all the artists to be the same as me in thought and deed.and probably very boring!

[soulster]

Perspective" ? Perspective "Really ? "......I understand but you are avoiding the content of my post. Most of the folk who post here have a realistic topic for discussion and post their opinion, position etc, up front and wait for a response. Your posts are basically bait and switch depending upon the feedback, in other words, like your quote above you used to feel a certain way now you don't. You have issues with certain artists behaving badly and after you get a response we finally get down to the real subject, that is whenever you make your big reveal as to the true nature of the post.

I have a cool idea: instead of you always attacking me personally, why not just focus on the topic? Can you do that?

Let me clarify further, I happen to like the Temptations, yet I, like everyone else here knows that David Ruffin, although a superlative singer and performer was a less than desirable person, band mate, father and husband. As time passed the information that was revealed really didn't hamper my enjoyment of the records that he made famous. Although I understood the many issues he had, If I wanted to discuss them on the forum, I'd simply ask the members how they felt about his personal life, cause and effect etc. I put that out and up front so that the folks here clearly understand where I was coming from. Because thats exactly what I want to talk about.

That's better! I am not looking to tell others what to do, I just wanted people to discuss something.

My other point was that you self righteously condemned all the artists that" we know and love or don't love",[[ that's a real mouthful) without any degree of specificity, because it would be impossible for you to make such a statement without all of us responding in kind to your assumption. Which we both know won't happen.

But, you see, if I am expressing my personal opinion, I am allowed, as are you, to criticize artists we choose not to listen to, for whatever reason it may be.

It sounds like you are are offended by the topic. So, I have a great idea: don't read or post in threads that offend you. Face it, man, i'm a forum member, and a long-time forum member. I just happen to be a bit younger and think differently that most of you. I have different experiences and opinions about music than you guys do. I didn't know this was a private, good-ol-boy's club. I guess I missed the part where it said you have to be over 60, a die-hard Supremes fan, and think like everyone else here.

This thread has went from you venting your opinion to you professing that you can sleep at night because of your moral or ethical code. I can't recall anyone asking a question that required that particular answer. But that's just me..........young folks who do remixes today, have a way of describing their "mix" attempts as being chopped and screwed and thats exactly how I see your posts......chopped and screwed.......or in other words, you got a lot of yin & yang going on in your head my friend...........

No, this thread has gone from a few members peacefully and civilly discussing an ethical/moral issue that many music fans face, to another personal attack by one of the old cronies [[you).

[paladin]

I have never attacked you, nor do I believe in or promote cronyism. You call people names because it suits your personality. You can whimper and whine all you like. Its like I said you referenced all "artist's that we know and love or don't" which in and of itself is a thoughtless contradiction. I am not a Supreme fan, don't discuss them or post on their threads, so you obviously have me confused with some other forum member.[[ probably that Yin & Yang thing again ) There are many folks here both young and old who post thoughtful and meaningful posts, some I have alluded too, others I have not. But I have noticed that when someone disagrees with you or challenges your [[sic) manhood, you go away for a while pout and come out swinging at imaginary adversaries. Have you ever noticed that within a majority of your posts you wind up explaining what you wanted to happen, and the direction you wanted the thread to take while you steadfastly try to manipulate the outcome ? Then when it doesn't happen you moan and groan because no one participated ! Probably not, but that's ok, I just called you on it. The proof and truth is self evident : all one has to do is read your comments, because they are very revealing. Oh yeah, one other thing, your posts don't offend me, they are very entertaining for the most part, you just can't seem to get out of your own way. You can rant and rave all you want, just once when someone points out a deficiency in your logic or lack thereof, why don't you just address it ? As my grandmother used to say to my sister, Soulster your slip is showing and you need to make some adjustments. Oh snap ! I'm sorry, if you did that then you wouldn't be able to dictate the outcome, now would you ? One last thing Soulster, there isn't anything that you have posted that is even remotely significant for me to even consider attacking you personally, you're not that important.

It sounds like you are are offended by the topic. So, I have a great idea: don't read or post in threads that offend you. Face it, man, i'm a forum member, and a long-time forum member. I just happen to be a bit younger and think differently that most of you. I have different experiences and opinions about music than you guys do. I didn't know this was a private, good-ol-boy's club. I guess I missed the part where it said you have to be over 60, a die-hard Supremes fan, and think like everyone else here.

You see Soulster in the trade we used to call a statement like this prima facie , you are now condemning a very large portion of the forum for no other reason than to bolster your insecurity about the members of SDF who most likely are no more concerned about you than I am.......and just think they haven't even responded to your post.

[soulster]

I did not bother to read your last post. Consider yourself back on my ignore list.

[tamla617]

come on you 2,just agree to disagree and lets get on.please?

its getting to a future thread titled.....

removing members who have wildly differing views and offensive behaviour

[ralpht]

Time to lock this one down also. Getting a little stupid gang.