Politically Correct Anti-Rape Feminists Refuse to Condemn Rap Music

We recently blogged on a forum at Marquette were the usual politically correct leftist professors discussed the issue of rape, and said a variety of bizarre things.

But one of the most bizarre came when we decided to throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings during the question and answer period at the end.

The panel had been fussing and fuming about the evils of “hypermasculinity” and “objectifying” women.

So we asked them: “will you therefore condemn rap music.”

Members of the panel said they would not. We put it to them that rap music thrives on “hypermasculinity” and “objectifying” women.

They said that rock and roll does that too.

We replied that content analysis shows that rap music does that a lot more than other genres. They blew it off.

But the facts aren’t hard to ascertain. From a new study by Brian A. Primack of the Medical School of the University of Pittsburgh.

Background: Adolescents are exposed to 104 minutes of popular music daily, and sexual content is highly prevalent in popular music lyrics.

Methods: Two independent coders analyzed references to sex and degrading sex in the top songs of 2005 in various genres according to Billboard magazine. We simultaneously conducted a cross-sectional survey of 302 urban ninth grade students in which we measured sexual experience, genre preference, and fourteen covariates related to sexual experience in adolescents.

Results: References to sexual intercourse were most common in Rap music (83%), followed by R&B/Hip-Hop (56%) and Rock music (7%). References to degrading sex were also most common in Rap music (76%) followed by R&B/Hip-Hop (41%) and Rock music (3%). In the fully adjusted and trimmed model (covariates included gender, age, race, socioeconomic status, rebelliousness, academic achievement, and desire to lose weight), preference of Rap music was associated with increased odds of having had sexual intercourse . . . whereas preference of Rock music was associated with decreased odds . . . . Preference of R&B/Hip-Hop was not associated with increased or decreased odds of having had sexual intercourse.

Discussion: Preference of musical genre is independently associated with early sexual experience in adolescents. In particular, those preferring genres with more sexual references are more likely to have had sex.

We doubt that panel members objected to ninth graders having sex, but shouldn’t they have been disturbed by the fact that 76% of rap songs had references to degrading sex?

Of course, it goes beyond sex. From the abstract of another paper from the same project:

Objective: To perform a comprehensive content analysis of substances of abuse in contemporary popular music.

Design: We analyzed the 279 most popular songs of 2005 according to Billboard magazine. Two coders working independently used a standardized data collection instrument to code portrayal of substances of abuse.

Outcome Measures: Presence and explicit use of substances of abuse, and motivations for, associations with, and consequences of substance use.

Results: Ninety-three (33.3%) of the 279 songs portrayed substance use, with an average of 35.2 substance references per song-hour. Portrayal of substance use varied significantly by genre, with one or more references in 9% of pop, 14% of rock, 20% of R&B/hip-hop, 37% of country, and 77% of rap. While only 2.9% of songs portrayed tobacco use, 23.7% depicted alcohol, 13.6% marijuana, and 11.5% other or unspecified substances. Substance use was most often motivated by peer/social pressure (48%) or sex (30%). Use was commonly associated with partying (54%), sex (46%), violence (29%), and/or humor (24%). Only 4 songs (4%) contained explicit anti-use messages and none portrayed substance refusal. The majority of songs (68%) with substance use portrayed more positive than negative consequences; these positive consequences were most commonly social, sexual, financial, or emotional.

So it seems that drugs and sex don’t particularly go with rock and roll, but they do go with rap.

If panel members were somehow ignorant of this reality, their response might be understandable.

But panel member Ed de St. Aubin knew of content analyses showing exactly what percentage of rape victims in porno films are portrayed as having an orgasm!

What’s going on here?

Simple. Feminists aren’t particularly “pro-woman.” If they were, they would be much more forthright condemning rap music. They would also be forthright in condemning the way fundamentalist Islam treats women. And they would also have objected to the way Bill Clinton treated women.

But they aren’t really “pro-woman.” They are leftists, and condemning anything coming from the black community is verboten.

[Update]

A feminist source of ours points out that there is plenty of feminist writing condemning the treatment of women and sex in rap music.

Indeed, videos taking this exact tact can be found in Raynor Library.

This same source, however, points out that the intersection of race and gender can get pretty dicey, and politically correct people (our source didn’t use that term) are cross-pressured when the two clash head-to-head.

Ludacris At Summerfest

It’s been the object of a campaign of Charlie Sykes’ joined by (for example) James Harris of The National Conversation.

Rapper Ludacris has been chosen to be a headline act at Summerfest.

Sykes post on the subject gives a fair sample of the really vile stuff that the cultural elders of the city have decided to endorse.

But the disapproval shown by Sykes and Harris has not been universal in the blogosphere.

Christian Schneider of Atomic Trousers has posted something that is not exactly a defense of the foul mouthed rapper, but at least an explanation of why he thinks it’s not a big deal.

As far as I know, Ludacris didn’t shoot anybody. Suggesting that he, a popular entertainer, is in any way responsible for violence on the street has it exactly backwards. . . . And why people who usually abhor those who blame the criminal actions of individuals on society are now handing the killers a “rapper made me do it” defense is beyond me.

The nihilistic culture of violence and sexuality exists in our inner city, and Ludacris is holding a mirror up to that way of life so it can see itself. Ludacris is a byproduct of that culture - the culture is not a byproduct of Ludacris.

Rappers aren’t millionaires because they sell CDs to black people. Rappers gain fame worldwide because they sell CDs to white people. Suburban white kids eat this stuff up because it makes them feel “authentic.” If you looked at Ludacris’ record sales, I bet you’d see just as many CDs sold in Brookfield, Menomonee Falls, and Franklin as you do in Milwaukee. But where is the violence in those “white” communities? If Ludacris was such a negative influence, why aren’t all the white kids in Oconomowoc gunning each other down?

It’s simple - because the culture comes first. Fatherlessness. Poverty. Lawlessness. Those are the problems that face our inner cities - rap music just packages those themes and markets them to the world.

We left a comment on Atomic Trousers, and we’ll repeat it here.

Christian,

I agree with you about “the culture.” But what is “the culture?”

It’s probably an easy 100 things, but Ludacris is one of those 100!

So how does one improve the culture? Shunning and isolating Ludacris would be one thing. Doing the same to another dozen like him would be a dozen things.

A dozen good black role models would be another dozen good things.

Attaching some stigma to having kids out of wedlock would be a huge good thing.

Getting tough with men who knock women up and fail to take responsibility would be another huge good thing.

As for those suburban kids who are probably buying Ludacris CDs: there is a fair amount of something very close to racism about that.

Probably a lot of these kids are liberals and think that this is “authentic black culture” and that they are being “multicultural” somehow. But the truth is they are getting enjoyment out of seeing black people demeaned.

So the white kids don’t go out and shoot people (mostly)? If you have enough advantages in your life, a nasty influence or two is something you are likely to blow off. Besides, if you don’t actually indentify with the blacks in the rap videos, you aren’t likely to emulate them.

Cultural change happens when a large number of people decide they will fight to turn this or that “one thing” in the right direction. Not understanding rational choice theory, they ignore the fact that their sole contribution makes an insignificant difference.

With enough of those people, the culture can turn.

It’s long past due to turn on the racist rappers.

In fairness to Schneider, he points out that a fair amount of rap has a positive message.

Fine. Let’s all encourage that. But let’s don’t encourage or endorse people like Ludacris.