Universities ban Blurred Lines on campuses around UK - Polidicks

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42256387]Wasn't aware that a myisoginistic song about raping drunk chicks is an amazing thought worthy of being shares at a uni.[/QUOTE] I really don't get what's so threatening about ideas that you don't like. If the idea is bad people will reject it. Why do you (or any other person) get to be the arbiter of what idea is good? It seems to me the fear is that people like the song and we just can't have that can we! So BAN IT!

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42256244]Have you even listened to the song? It's about a dude getting nasty with drunk chicks saying that "they want it." Fucking somebody without proper consent is rape.[/QUOTE] So songs that are about "busting niggas and cops" are better?

[QUOTE=Blind Lulu;42256443]Or, get this, maybe many students don't want to hear about how great rape is in a place of learning.[/QUOTE] Then don't go to the event that plays it? Or protest it with your own freedom of speech. Or inform people about how bad it is. Or any other action to combat bad ideas. Banning something is nothing more than cowardice because you are too afraid to actually face the issue in an open forum.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42256244]Have you even listened to the song? It's about a dude getting nasty with drunk chicks saying that "they want it." Fucking somebody without proper consent is rape.[/QUOTE] Bullshit. There's no mention of alcohol or drunkenness at all in the song. He could very well (and far more likely) be talking about a hot girl who is playing 'hard to get' by pretending to not be interested and/or getting into poorly structured monogamous relationships (might even be pretending to have a boyfriend to vet his reaction) to avoid being classed as sluts, despite them feeling more promiscuous naturally. [U][B]Here's a straight up interpretation, directly from the lyrics. Please attempt to argue against it.[/B][/U] [I]OK now he was close, tried to domesticate you[/I] Okay, you have a boyfriend who's trying to convince you to be his property (domesticated). [I]But you're an animal, baby, it's in your nature[/I] But you want to be sexual, it's your nature (monogamy is just a common idea). [I]Just let me liberate you[/I] Let me liberate you from the chains of sexual repression. [I]You don't need no papers[/I] You don't need to conform to the commonly-accepted ideals of sexuality. [I]That man is not your maker[/I] Men do not control nor own women, do what you wish to do, instead of being a slave to your 'boyfriend'. --- [I]And that's why I'm gon' take a good girl[/I] He's going to find a 'good girl' - Someone who appears to abide the commonly accepted ideals of sexuality. [I]I know you want it[/I] But he knows she wants it. Note that he's not saying [B]ALL GIRLS[/B] want it. Just one. [I]Can't let it get past me[/I] The girl in particular is letting onto her feelings, probably being flirtatious and physical towards him, as demonstrated in this line: [I]The way you grab me[/I] She's initiating the flirting and obviously demonstrating her interest. [I]Go ahead, get at me[/I] He invites her to escalate the interaction.

If they wanted to ban all music from being played loudly on campus where other's were forced to listen you wouldn't hear me calling them out for censorship, but that's not what they're doing. They are banning a specific song, or more specifically, a specific idea from being talked about because it goes against their beliefs.

[QUOTE=sgman91;42256456]Or inform people about how bad it is.[/QUOTE] Uhhh...people did that. And they agreed to ban the playing of it at university events or in university buildings. You just defeated yourself there, good work. You are severely detached from reality if you can't see why a university is allowed to ban a song.

[QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484]Bullshit. There's no mention of alcohol or drunkenness at all in the song. He could very well (and far more likely) be talking about a hot girl who is playing 'hard to get' by pretending to not be interested and/or getting into poorly structured monogamous relationships (might even be pretending to have a boyfriend to vet his reaction) to avoid being classed as sluts, despite them feeling more promiscuous naturally. [U][B]Here's a straight up interpretation, directly from the lyrics. Please attempt to argue against it.[/B][/U] [I]OK now he was close, tried to domesticate you[/I] Okay, you have a boyfriend who's trying to convince you to be his property (domesticated). [I]But you're an animal, baby, it's in your nature[/I] But you want to be sexual, it's your nature (monogamy is just a common idea). [I]Just let me liberate you[/I] Let me liberate you from the chains of sexual repression. [I]You don't need no papers[/I] You don't need to conform to the commonly-accepted ideals of sexuality. [I]That man is not your maker[/I] Men do not control nor own women, do what you wish to do, instead of being a slave to your 'boyfriend'. --- [I]And that's why I'm gon' take a good girl[/I] He's going to find a 'good girl' - Someone who abides the commonly accepted ideals of sexuality. [I]I know you want it[/I] He knows she wants it. Note that he's not saying [B]ALL GIRLS[/B] want it. Just one. [I]Can't let it get past me[/I] The girl in particular is letting onto her feelings, probably being flirtatious and physical towards him, as demonstrated in this line: [I]The way you grab me[/I] She's initiating the flirting and obviously demonstrating her interest. [I]Go ahead, get at me[/I] He invites her to escalate the interaction.[/QUOTE] Congratulations on your sexism dude great job m8

the eusa (edinburgh university union) banned it, but my uni (napier) hasn't. i would push for it, but lad culture is alive and kicking at my uni so there's shit all i can do about it. there isn't even a feminist society to mobilise.

[QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484]words[/QUOTE] hth this is going to fall on death ears, anything less than a written contractual agreement to engage in sexual activity is perceived as "rapey" or "creepy" here. You're trying to explain the subtleties of flirting to a group who literally can't reconcile the fact that men can pursue women sexually without thinking they aren't human beings.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;42256562]hth this is going to fall on death ears, anything less than a written contractual agreement to engage in sexual activity is perceived as "rapey" or "creepy" here. You're trying to explain the subtleties of flirting to a group who literally can't reconcile the fact that men can pursue women sexually without thinking they aren't human beings.[/QUOTE] um [I]nooo[/I]

[QUOTE=RobbL;42255462]Might as well gan all gangsta rap, extreme metal genres, ect. for their 'undesirable' lyrics while they're at it then Or just don't ban any music[/QUOTE] Plus the majority of club/chart music is full of misogyny anyway but w/e

[QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484] Let me liberate you from the chains of sexual repression.[/QUOTE] Ayy girl let my liberate you with my dick Look, some universities not playing a song at their events isn't going to throw us back into a sexual dark age. They didn't even ban the song, they're just not playing it.

Guys I'm pretty sure the whole plan I this song was to cause a huge controversy and rack in media attention. So say what you will about it, but thicke is winning in the end.

[QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484]Bullshit.[/QUOTE] If we are going into personal interpretations of the lyrics, [quote] [I]You don't need no papers[/I] You don't need to conform to the commonly-accepted ideals of sexuality. [/QUOTE] This seems very flimsy. To me it sounds more like "I don't want to see your ID in case you are underage." [editline]20th September 2013[/editline] Either that or he is confirming that he is not a male prostitute and does not require payment, but I prefer the first one.

[QUOTE=Patriarch;42255249]Well it's hardly like they're censoring something good or important.[/QUOTE] that's not the point of being concerned about censorship

Edinburgh uni student here....fuck this shit, we should be able to play whatever we want.

[QUOTE=Akmeeda;42256764]Edinburgh uni student here....fuck this shit, we should be able to play whatever we want.[/QUOTE] you can play what you want though, just you won't hear it at your headphone disco. (which btw, was just fine without it)

[QUOTE=squids_eye;42256702]This seems very flimsy. To me it sounds more like "I don't want to see your ID in case you are underage."[/QUOTE] Based on the context of domestication and such it seems he's talking about marriage papers.

Could give a shit less about the content Censoring media for the most part is destructive to the fabric of society unless it harms innocents during the production of said media. If no one is actually harmed during the production of any content I am okay with It being around. Although being okay with something is a very wide spectrum ranging from "tolerate on principal even though I think it's the antichrist" to "thank god for lack of censorship grand theft auto 5 is awesome"

[QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484]Bullshit. [/QUOTE] You seem to be leaving out some lines. [QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484] There's no mention of alcohol or drunkenness at all in the song. [/QUOTE] You're far from plastic Talk about [B]getting blasted[/B] I hate these blurred lines [URL]http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blasted[/URL] Baby can you breathe? I got this from Jamaica It always works for me, Dakota to Decatur, uh huh [QUOTE=SCopE5000;42256484] [U]Here's a straight up interpretation, directly from the lyrics. Please attempt to argue against it.[/U] [B]It isn't considering you have left out some of the lines.[/B] [I]The way you grab me[/I] [B]Must wanna get nasty[/B] -could imply certain PUA concepts. [I]Go ahead, get at me[/I] [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=FoodStuffs;42256869]Could give a shit less about the content Censoring media for the most part is destructive to the fabric of society unless it harms innocents during the production of said media. [/QUOTE] It's censorship in the same way that not buying products produced by Foxconn is censorship. It isn't, it's more along the lines of boycotting.

[QUOTE=Thlis;42256898]You seem to be leaving out some lines. You're far from plastic Talk about [B]getting blasted[/B] I hate these blurred lines [url]http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blasted[/url] Baby can you breathe? I got this from Jamaica It always works for me, Dakota to Decatur, uh huh[/QUOTE] so uh they are getting drunk, high and flirting but its about rape because.... ??

Just because something is around that simply bothers or offends you and hasn't directly caused suffering doesn't mean it should be ganked like an opinionated public street speaker getting a hello from big brother by being zapped with a stun prod and thrown in the back of a van. Eventually waking up somewhere in the middle of buttfuck nowhere, earth, not being able to recall who they are. I mean this kinda shit really is up there with gay marriage. It has nothing to do with those opposed to it. All the gay marriage debate is, is a bunch of people telling other people how to live their lives. In that way this is the same kind of thing. [editline]20th September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;42256898] It's censorship in the same way that not buying products produced by Foxconn is censorship. It isn't, it's more along the lines of boycotting.[/QUOTE] Boycotting is not partaking in something of your own volition Censorship is banning something. This is nowhere near boycotting. Boycotting is a choice made by everyone and is not dictated by law or anything like that. Making a rule against something is censorship. [editline]20th September 2013[/editline] I mean have they banned Tyler the creator or eminem? Both of them rap about cold blooded rape and murder, outright.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;42256562]hth this is going to fall on death ears, anything less than a written contractual agreement to engage in sexual activity is perceived as "rapey" or "creepy" here. You're trying to explain the subtleties of flirting to a group who literally can't reconcile the fact that men can pursue women sexually without thinking they aren't human beings.[/QUOTE] so I take this post to mean that you've raped women before nice one bro let me just put a couple more holes in your man punchcard, rape 10 and you get 1 free sex-with-a-minor [editline]20th September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;42256330]Honestly, I think people should be able to play whatever music they want at their own events. People can then choose to attend or not.[/QUOTE] K I'm gonna wear klan robes to student orientation and cry my little oppressed face right off when they kick me out If people don't like it they don't have to attend woe is the white man who cannot wear klan robes

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;42256961] I mean have they banned Tyler the creator or eminem? Both of them rap about cold blooded rape and murder, outright.[/QUOTE] Not that I'm defending this ban or whatever, but I don't think most Tyler the Creator or Eminem songs would be played on radios and stuff anyway.

Like two weeks ago I was in a taxi on the way to a hospital with my mum and this song was playing. I went from zoned out to actually listening to the lyrics and wondered how the fuck someone gets a song this rapey on the radio. That said, while I agree this song is a disgusting piece of shit I don't think censorship solves anything. The correct solution is to kill everyone who ever puts any money towards songs like this, or perhaps just crying in the realisation that people actually pay to listen to it and doing nothing.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;42256961]Just because something is around that simply bothers or offends you and hasn't directly caused suffering doesn't mean it should be ganked like an opinionated public street speaker getting a hello from big brother by being zapped with a stun prod and thrown in the back of a van. Eventually waking up somewhere in the middle of buttfuck nowhere, earth, not being able to recall who they are. I mean this kinda shit really is up there with gay marriage. It has nothing to do with those opposed to it. All the gay marriage debate is, is a bunch of people telling other people how to live their lives. In that way this is the same kind of thing. [editline]20th September 2013[/editline] Boycotting is not partaking in something of your own volition Censorship is banning something. This is nowhere near boycotting. Boycotting is a choice made by everyone and is not dictated by law or anything like that. Making a rule against something is censorship. [/QUOTE] um did you read the article or bounce straight to the sensationalist headline? they are banning it from being played on campus at events. this basically means the student union (which is a [I]democratic body[/I]) proposed a motion to stop it being played, they did a vote and they discovered a majority voted in favour. it's not telling people how to live their lives, as they can go home and play it in their flat or listen to it on their ipod if they [I]really[/I] need their blurred lines fix.

[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;42256700]Guys I'm pretty sure the whole plan I this song was to cause a huge controversy and rack in media attention. So say what you will about it, but thicke is winning in the end.[/QUOTE] winning what? the dickhead award?

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;42257850]Not that I'm defending this ban or whatever, but I don't think most Tyler the Creator or Eminem songs would be played on radios and stuff anyway.[/QUOTE] They paid eminem to rewrite his most popular songs so they could play them on MTV. Spurs I've heard Tyler on the radio as well

Well, as long as they can play [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-7TyQfkR-k[/url]

They should've banned Miley's new songs while they were at it.