Like the track, offended by the lyrics.

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

I'm not familiar with boom bye bye as a song itself and how it offends tbh, what's wrong with it?

It's about shooting gay people.

 

[bluestreak]

are they sampling the lyrics or the music?

 

[SubZeroCat]

It's about shooting gay people.

Oh

Saian Supa Crew's first album was fluffy and totally non offensive but ever since they moved away from the French banlieu kinda sound to the more mainstream American sound (with American rappers featuring on their tracks) they've gone a bit downhill IMO.

They should just stay French.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I much prefer listening to stuff by Roots Manuva, Saian Supa Crew and The Herbaliser (for example), not only for their musical styles but because the lyrics are non offensive/friendly/make a point about something etc.

That's the kind of hip hop I like.

Agreed, I like Roots Manuva even though I'm not a massive rap fan, for two reasons: a. the excellent fusion of rap/ragga and other styles, and b. The fact that he doesn't try to sound like some american gangsta/wanker type, and instead raps about stuff that I, as an every day English guy, can relate to.

 

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

are they sampling the lyrics or the music?

Not sure about that one - neilh?

If it's the lyrics, I dare say that Mark Lamarr v Shabba Ranks, The Word, 1992 must have passed them 'bye bye'...

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

It's all about Ty & The Lifesavas for unoffensive hip hop lyrics!

And then of course in the early 90s there was the painfully PC indie-crowd orientated hiphop like Disposable heroes and Consolidated. It seems quite dated now though...

 

[El Jugador]

To me, tunes that spout hatred and ignorance are really all about the lyricist revealing their own (or someone else's) fuckwittedness, rather than anyone proclaiming "this is all true and I agree with it" merely by listening to it or dancing to it. I'll even save my more stupid dance moves for the stupid songs...

Sure, some fucknuckles might interpret a homophobic lyric as official approval of their own prejudices, but really they are already feeling that way - and no one who is free of prejudice is really going to be changed on account of what some fool's song says. Ultimately all this "boom bye bye" bollocks merely reveals how the lyricist feels threatened by homosexuals and is seeking comforting approval from a bunch of ignorant knobheads - hardly something to sing about eh? ...And maybe actually quite funny how the big man can talk so strong yet be so afraid!

Moreover, consider when a toddler jumps about to a good tune - in their own mind's eye the tune remains just a bit of fun and any hatred that may be contained in the tune is rendered powerless and ineffective (to them at least) - and even when a more mature listener becomes aware of the hidden meaning then IMO they can still enjoy it if only by being aware of how it differs from their own point of view. Just because you hear it doesn't mean you agree with it, no?

So maybe we can take the meaning of a song's lyrics as ironic (or somehow otherwise containing a positive message) even despite the strong suspicion that they were not intended that way? I certainly hope that we can, not only if the tune is good, but also because I think there is a lesson in there - Somehow a good tune can transform a fuckwitted lyric into irony, or at least meaninglessness, if only in your own mind. To me that is one of the powers of music (and art and literature too) - that it can deliver good out of evil - since the only meaning that genuinely means anything at all is that which you personally draw from it and which you take away with you.

Should we feel as ashamed about looking at, say, a classical painting of a massacre or a rape? If not, then how about reading Mein Kampf on the tube? So where should the line be drawn?

Maybe the real problem lies in how we might feel about what other people would think when seeing us apparently enjoying a tune (or book or painting) as if by indulging it we somehow agreed with its sentiments - and that is a completely different matter more to do with our own selfconsciousness and confidence, and ultimately our own sense of self-righteousness. We are afraid that others might not understand what we are drawing from the song, and might judge us to be something that we're not, or otherwise deduce that we aren't the fine moral citizens that we think we are.

OK so I'll feel a little self-conscious dancing around happily to a song that rips the piss out of white people, because I am white, but equally I would feel just as much of a knob if I stopped and folded my arms with a scowl on my face for taking it so personally - is that fucked up? I dunno. What I do know is I'm utterly bullet proof and no juvenile lyric is gonna stop me when I feel the need to shake my arse about! So people can laugh at that, but that only ever says more about their own arsewittery anyway...

 

[milesy]

that is a very good post mister jugador, sir

on one drum and bass forum there was a long argument about the track that "inspired" this thread, and there were people saying that they know gay people who aren't offended by it, and who will happily dance to it and to other dancehall/jungle tracks with homophobic lyrics. and i suppose what better way of saying "fuck you" to the bigots than to have the people who the hate is poured on to say "bollocks you may think i'm gonna burn in hell but i'm gonna dance to your track anyway".

i'm often torn between two view points, the one of "fuck this i'm not gonna listen to such hate" and then "well it's only a song". and i very much doubt such a track will inspire someone to become homophobic. it would only fuel hate that was already there, i reckon. a knobhead is a knobhead.

 

[top_biller]

Wholeheartedly agree with El J's post. Da Lench Mob remains on my playlist. I can pity them while nodding my head.

 

[Iam]

Top post, El J.

 

[milesy]

Maybe the real problem lies in how we might feel about what other people would think when seeing us apparently enjoying a tune (or book or painting) as if by indulging it we somehow agreed with its sentiments - and that is a completely different matter more to do with our own selfconsciousness and confidence, and ultimately our own sense of self-righteousness. We are afraid that others might not understand what we are drawing from the song, and might judge us to be something that we're not, or otherwise deduce that we aren't the fine moral citizens that we think we are.

hmm...i don't get worried that people may think i'm a selassie worshipping rasta if i listen to reggae or jungle tracks that go on about jah love and shit...so why do i worry about what people think of me if i listen to a track that calls for the burning of gays? both are just songs, and i agree with the sentiments of neither.

as mentioned by someone else on that drum n bass forum thread - people have happily listened to "killing in the name of" by rage against the machine and "cop killer" by ice t's band without neccesarily agreeing with - or being thought of as agreeing with - the killing of people just because they are cops.

althoguh i'm not gonna try and dig my snoop dogg CD out of the bin

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

To me, tunes that spout hatred and ignorance are really all about the lyricist revealing their own (or someone else's) fuckwittedness, rather than anyone proclaiming "this is all true and I agree with it" merely by listening to it or dancing to it. I'll even save my more stupid dance moves for the stupid songs...

Sure, some fucknuckles might interpret a homophobic lyric as official approval of their own prejudices, but really they are already feeling that way - and no one who is free of prejudice is really going to be changed on account of what some fool's song says. Ultimately all this "boom bye bye" bollocks merely reveals how the lyricist feels threatened by homosexuals and is seeking comforting approval from a bunch of ignorant knobheads - hardly something to sing about eh? ...And maybe actually quite funny how the big man can talk so strong yet be so afraid!

Moreover, consider when a toddler jumps about to a good tune - in their own mind's eye the tune remains just a bit of fun and any hatred that may be contained in the tune is rendered powerless and ineffective (to them at least) - and even when a more mature listener becomes aware of the hidden meaning then IMO they can still enjoy it if only by being aware of how it differs from their own point of view. Just because you hear it doesn't mean you agree with it, no?

So maybe we can take the meaning of a song's lyrics as ironic (or somehow otherwise containing a positive message) even despite the strong suspicion that they were not intended that way? I certainly hope that we can, not only if the tune is good, but also because I think there is a lesson in there - Somehow a good tune can transform a fuckwitted lyric into irony, or at least meaninglessness, if only in your own mind. To me that is one of the powers of music (and art and literature too) - that it can deliver good out of evil - since the only meaning that genuinely means anything at all is that which you personally draw from it and which you take away with you.

Should we feel as ashamed about looking at, say, a classical painting of a massacre or a rape? If not, then how about reading Mein Kampf on the tube? So where should the line be drawn?

Maybe the real problem lies in how we might feel about what other people would think when seeing us apparently enjoying a tune (or book or painting) as if by indulging it we somehow agreed with its sentiments - and that is a completely different matter more to do with our own selfconsciousness and confidence, and ultimately our own sense of self-righteousness. We are afraid that others might not understand what we are drawing from the song, and might judge us to be something that we're not, or otherwise deduce that we aren't the fine moral citizens that we think we are.

OK so I'll feel a little self-conscious dancing around happily to a song that rips the piss out of white people, because I am white, but equally I would feel just as much of a knob if I stopped and folded my arms with a scowl on my face for taking it so personally - is that fucked up? I dunno. What I do know is I'm utterly bullet proof and no juvenile lyric is gonna stop me when I feel the need to shake my arse about! So people can laugh at that, but that only ever says more about their own arsewittery anyway...

<stamps on own foot and punchs self in kindneys>fookin 'ell i agree wiv tha 'ippy </stamps on own foot and punchs self in kindneys>

 

[kyser_soze]

Well I'm not about to start burning my existing CD and vinyl because I'm no longer overjoyed about hearing how Easy-E is gonna fuck nuff hos or whatever but one of the reasons I don't but hiphop anymore (aside from about 95% of it being turgid shite) is that I've become heartily sick of the excessive misogyny on some tracks. Maybe it's just an age thing or I've been nancified by Urban but it just doesn't cut it...

It's kinda the same argument as listening to Wagner knowing that he was a rampant anti-semite and that there are allusions to the same in much of his work.

 

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

hmm...i don't get worried that people may think i'm a selassie worshipping rasta if i listen to reggae or jungle tracks that go on about jah love and shit...so why do i worry about what people think of me if i listen to a track that calls for the burning of gays? both are just songs, and i agree with the sentiments of neither.

as mentioned by someone else on that drum n bass forum thread - people have happily listened to "killing in the name of" by rage against the machine and "cop killer" by ice t's band without neccesarily agreeing with - or being thought of as agreeing with - the killing of people just because they are cops.

althoguh i'm not gonna try and dig my snoop dogg CD out of the bin

I agree with a lot of the points of the 'don't have to be like to like' variety - after all, one of my favourite tracks ever is 'That Lady' by the Isleys, which unfortunately contains some slightly cringeworthy proto-Snoop lyrics about his 'woman' doing what he says.

What really bothers me though is how, for example, a young person in the process of coming to terms with their sexuality feels when they see lyrics victimising or condemning them. It can be an extremely damaging experience, and for what exactly...?

 

[neilh]

Not sure about that one - neilh?

If it's the lyrics, I dare say that Mark Lamarr v Shabba Ranks, The Word, 1992 must have passed them 'bye bye'...

lyrics; i'm tryin to remember whether they sample it directly or sing it themselves, but either way the line "boom bye bye in a battyman's head" is clearly in it; i think that seems to be the subject matter of the verses too but don't speak french well enough to know what they're saying.

as for el jugador's post, enjoyed it, though kind of disagree.

We are afraid that others might not understand what we are drawing from the song, and might judge us to be something that we're not, or otherwise deduce that we aren't the fine moral citizens that we think we are.

it's not that i'd be bothered about what folk think of me, more that it might influence what they think and make them more think some views are acceptable because they think i (or whoever) agrees with it.

cos no matter how much i could try and tell myself i should play something like chi-chi man because folk can find it ironic, the truth is there would be plenty of folk who would take it at face value; and imo the whole chi-chi hatin lyrics is having an influence on some folks opinions of homosexuality.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

humm i dunno ... stuff like "one night in new york city" has some questionable lyrics but i doesn't stop me listening to it (plus it is don't in an OTT silly maner so i dunno if it counts)

 

[neilh]

didn't d12 and eminem solve this type of hand wringing and explain it for about the n'th time (after nwa, PE, run dmc etc etc etc...)

it's music, it's not even slightly like the concept of screwdriver or that type of real hate music this is just hand wringing ...

i don't see how it is so different from "real hate music" apart from the fact it's based on sexuality rather than race, and i don't think it's hand wringing when this shit does have an affect on folks lives for the worst

 

[ck]

Googled Apache's track to make sure I got the album right and found this page:

http://www.amren.com/rap1.htm

I'm going home to burn my Digable Planets album.

I'll buy it from you ?! My mate snapped my copy of it when he was drunk. It's a fantastic LP.

 

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

I just don't like nasty-minded, childish, anti-liberal and ultimately destructive attitudes emanating from my stereo, that's all. Without being evangelistically PC, there are plenty of far more intelligent lyrics with every bit as much funk in the accompanying sounds.

And a line such as "Boom bye bye in a batty man's brain" is inexcusably retarded and pure fucking evil as far as I'm concerned.

 

[bluestreak]

great post jugs.

 

[grosun]

To me, tunes that spout hatred and ignorance are really all about the lyricist revealing their own (or someone else's) fuckwittedness, rather than anyone proclaiming "this is all true and I agree with it" merely by listening to it or dancing to it. I'll even save my more stupid dance moves for the stupid songs...

Sure, some fucknuckles might interpret a homophobic lyric as official approval of their own prejudices, but really they are already feeling that way - and no one who is free of prejudice is really going to be changed on account of what some fool's song says. Ultimately all this "boom bye bye" bollocks merely reveals how the lyricist feels threatened by homosexuals and is seeking comforting approval from a bunch of ignorant knobheads - hardly something to sing about eh? ...And maybe actually quite funny how the big man can talk so strong yet be so afraid!

Moreover, consider when a toddler jumps about to a good tune - in their own mind's eye the tune remains just a bit of fun and any hatred that may be contained in the tune is rendered powerless and ineffective (to them at least) - and even when a more mature listener becomes aware of the hidden meaning then IMO they can still enjoy it if only by being aware of how it differs from their own point of view. Just because you hear it doesn't mean you agree with it, no?

So maybe we can take the meaning of a song's lyrics as ironic (or somehow otherwise containing a positive message) even despite the strong suspicion that they were not intended that way? I certainly hope that we can, not only if the tune is good, but also because I think there is a lesson in there - Somehow a good tune can transform a fuckwitted lyric into irony, or at least meaninglessness, if only in your own mind. To me that is one of the powers of music (and art and literature too) - that it can deliver good out of evil - since the only meaning that genuinely means anything at all is that which you personally draw from it and which you take away with you.

Should we feel as ashamed about looking at, say, a classical painting of a massacre or a rape? If not, then how about reading Mein Kampf on the tube? So where should the line be drawn?

Maybe the real problem lies in how we might feel about what other people would think when seeing us apparently enjoying a tune (or book or painting) as if by indulging it we somehow agreed with its sentiments - and that is a completely different matter more to do with our own selfconsciousness and confidence, and ultimately our own sense of self-righteousness. We are afraid that others might not understand what we are drawing from the song, and might judge us to be something that we're not, or otherwise deduce that we aren't the fine moral citizens that we think we are.

OK so I'll feel a little self-conscious dancing around happily to a song that rips the piss out of white people, because I am white, but equally I would feel just as much of a knob if I stopped and folded my arms with a scowl on my face for taking it so personally - is that fucked up? I dunno. What I do know is I'm utterly bullet proof and no juvenile lyric is gonna stop me when I feel the need to shake my arse about! So people can laugh at that, but that only ever says more about their own arsewittery anyway...

Hm... thing is, I think that large numbers of people dancing in (seeming?) approval to such songs *can* influence young minds, reinforcing the idea that it's ok to hate homosexuals f'rinstance... & quite how someone who's (for instance) gay & not come out yet would feel about all this, even if most of the folk who're dancing are like you, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty certain it's not likely to do their confidence that much good. On the other hand, I'm sure I read about a gay dancehall/hiphop night somewhere, so who knows.. maybe they appropriate those things & turn 'em round.

Hrrumpf... overall though, maybe you're right about that external perception thing, and that's an element of it, but just as I wouldn't want to listen to Hitler's speeches for entertainment, I don't want to listen to some fuckwit banging on about killing the batty man, 'specially when I know he's reflecting/reinforcing a culture which results in just that happening. Even if he's written a catchy tune to go with it (& yes, I get boom bye bye stuck in my head quite often, despite not owning it & not hearing it for years), I don't want him to get any money for saying crap like that.

& I've certainly been in situations where the majority of the audience seemed pretty happy with the "bun dem" sentiments... have moved on from a number of soundsystems at Notting Hill when anti-gay songs came on & loads of the crowd made gun signs with their hands.

Your point about classical paintings of rapes etc. is interesting, but I think there's a big difference between depicting something (which these paintings do, just as tunes by Mobb Deep & others depict drug-dealing gun-shooting lifestyles) & advocating something. I doubt any of the paintings are really advocating rape or anything, and even if they were, they're probably old, not relevant to today's society in terms of the issues you're dealing with. I think if someone painted overtly political paintings depicting how the murder of homosexuals would make the world a better place, or ones say, representing the views of the violent end of the BNP's support-spectrum, that'd be quite a different matter, & I'm not sure you'd happily look at them in such an abstracted manner. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't a) go to see that exhibition, and b) might well boycott anyone involved in it. Not saying people shouldn't be allowed to spout shite if they want to, but equally I feel there should be consequences, & preferably consequences which hit them in the pocket.

On the "nice" hiphop front, I'm sorry but I find most of those guys dull... yet again, the devil (usually) has the best tunes. Sure, Roots Manuva, Tai & all are good, but Rodney P or Bruza f'rinstance are better, despite talking a load of hard-man nonsense.

 

[top_biller]

I'll buy it from you ?! My mate snapped my copy of it when he was drunk. It's a fantastic LP.

I was joking. Just surprised to see that Butterfly, Daddy Longlegs and Ladybird, or whatever they're called, were included on that list.

To be honest, I've got music by pretty much everyone on it. A lot artists explain their reference to "devil" as simply a reference to "evil white men" not just whites in general. Kam and Apache can't be explained away that easily though.

 

[milesy]

And a line such as "Boom bye bye in a batty man's brain" is inexcusably retarded and pure fucking evil as far as I'm concerned.

yep. there's no way that i'd listen to that. even if the sound of the song was brilliant - which i don't think it is at all - i couldn't ignore such horrible lyrics. same with that snoop dogg CD. but then i have no qualms about hearing the prodigy's "smack my bitch up", or any number of grime or garage tracks i;ve heard which talk about going to merc someone*. it's all context i suppose, and how you take things.

(*i guess with a lot of those tracks they just mean lyrically or sonically, ya get me?)

 

[neilh]

Hm... thing is, I think that large numbers of people dancing in (seeming?) approval to such songs *can* influence young minds, reinforcing the idea that it's ok to hate homosexuals f'rinstance... & quite how someone who's (for instance) gay & not come out yet would feel about all this, even if most of the folk who're dancing are like you, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty certain it's not likely to do their confidence that much good. On the other hand, I'm sure I read about a gay dancehall/hiphop night somewhere, so who knows.. maybe they appropriate those things & turn 'em round.

Hrrumpf... overall though, maybe you're right about that external perception thing, and that's an element of it, but just as I wouldn't want to listen to Hitler's speeches for entertainment, I don't want to listen to some fuckwit banging on about killing the batty man, 'specially when I know he's reflecting/reinforcing a culture which results in just that happening. Even if he's written a catchy tune to go with it (& yes, I get boom bye bye stuck in my head quite often, despite not owning it & not hearing it for years), I don't want him to get any money for saying crap like that.

& I've certainly been in situations where the majority of the audience seemed pretty happy with the "bun dem" sentiments... have moved on from a number of soundsystems at Notting Hill when anti-gay songs came on & loads of the crowd made gun signs with their hands.

Your point about classical paintings of rapes etc. is interesting, but I think there's a big difference between depicting something (which these paintings do, just as tunes by Mobb Deep & others depict drug-dealing gun-shooting lifestyles) & advocating something. I doubt any of the paintings are really advocating rape or anything, and even if they were, they're probably old, not relevant to today's society in terms of the issues you're dealing with. I think if someone painted overtly political paintings depicting how the murder of homosexuals would make the world a better place, or ones say, representing the views of the violent end of the BNP's support-spectrum, that'd be quite a different matter, & I'm not sure you'd happily look at them in such an abstracted manner. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't a) go to see that exhibition, and b) might well boycott anyone involved in it. Not saying people shouldn't be allowed to spout shite if they want to, but equally I feel there should be consequences, & preferably consequences which hit them in the pocket.

On the "nice" hiphop front, I'm sorry but I find most of those guys dull... yet again, the devil (usually) has the best tunes. Sure, Roots Manuva, Tai & all are good, but Rodney P or Bruza f'rinstance are better, despite talking a load of hard-man nonsense.

that post sums up exactly what i kinda felt bout el jugs post but in a much better way.
but as for the last one, does rodney p do any stuff thats seen as homophobic? i thought you were going to class him with the "nice" hiphop. and there's plenty stuff like klashnikoff, skinnyman etc which isn't seen as "nice" but still doesn't tend to come out wi misogynistic or homophobic stuff all the time.

 

[neilh]

(*i guess with a lot of those tracks they just mean lyrically or sonically, ya get me?)

yeah, i think a lot of folk listening to dancehall don't recognise that tracks about murdering/killing other dj's normally means sonically or lyrically, as oppose to the bunn the chi chi stuff which seems to be meant literally.

 

[ck]

I was joking. Just surprised to see that Butterfly, Daddy Longlegs and Ladybird, or whatever they're called, were included on that list.

To be honest, I've got music by pretty much everyone on it. A lot artists explain their reference to "devil" as simply a reference to "evil white men" not just whites in general. Kam and Apache can't be explained away that easily though.

I'm the same. It does annoy me. I'm a massive lover of Miles Davis' stuff , but have you read his autobiography ? His thoughts on whites are hardly complimentary...

 

[grosun]

but as for the last one, does rodney p do any stuff thats seen as homophobic? i thought you were going to class him with the "nice" hiphop. and there's plenty stuff like klashnikoff, skinnyman etc which isn't seen as "nice" but still doesn't tend to come out wi misogynistic or homophobic stuff all the time.

Oh, nono! No homophobic stuff.. at least not as far as I know.. it was more in response to the "fluffy" hiphop mentioned earlier in the thread by szc & others... I just find that whilst the views/personas of the 'nicer' artists are much closer to my own & to those of pple I'd be likely to get on well with, musically bad boys usually cut it a lot better musically.

 

[El Jugador]

Hm... thing is, I think that large numbers of people dancing in (seeming?) approval to such songs *can* influence young minds, reinforcing the idea that it's ok to hate homosexuals f'rinstance... & quite how someone who's (for instance) gay & not come out yet would feel about all this, even if most of the folk who're dancing are like you, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty certain it's not likely to do their confidence that much good. On the other hand, I'm sure I read about a gay dancehall/hiphop night somewhere, so who knows.. maybe they appropriate those things & turn 'em round.

Hrrumpf... overall though, maybe you're right about that external perception thing, and that's an element of it, but just as I wouldn't want to listen to Hitler's speeches for entertainment, I don't want to listen to some fuckwit banging on about killing the batty man, 'specially when I know he's reflecting/reinforcing a culture which results in just that happening. Even if he's written a catchy tune to go with it (& yes, I get boom bye bye stuck in my head quite often, despite not owning it & not hearing it for years), I don't want him to get any money for saying crap like that.

& I've certainly been in situations where the majority of the audience seemed pretty happy with the "bun dem" sentiments... have moved on from a number of soundsystems at Notting Hill when anti-gay songs came on & loads of the crowd made gun signs with their hands.

Your point about classical paintings of rapes etc. is interesting, but I think there's a big difference between depicting something (which these paintings do, just as tunes by Mobb Deep & others depict drug-dealing gun-shooting lifestyles) & advocating something. I doubt any of the paintings are really advocating rape or anything, and even if they were, they're probably old, not relevant to today's society in terms of the issues you're dealing with. I think if someone painted overtly political paintings depicting how the murder of homosexuals would make the world a better place, or ones say, representing the views of the violent end of the BNP's support-spectrum, that'd be quite a different matter, & I'm not sure you'd happily look at them in such an abstracted manner. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't a) go to see that exhibition, and b) might well boycott anyone involved in it. Not saying people shouldn't be allowed to spout shite if they want to, but equally I feel there should be consequences, & preferably consequences which hit them in the pocket.

On the "nice" hiphop front, I'm sorry but I find most of those guys dull... yet again, the devil (usually) has the best tunes. Sure, Roots Manuva, Tai & all are good, but Rodney P or Bruza f'rinstance are better, despite talking a load of hard-man nonsense.

Very fair points well made grosun and neilh.

I'm not sure how a painting could actually advocate something, rather than merely depicting it - Can't the same apply to a song? Then it's up to the observer/listener to draw meaning from it. Although I have to agree that the kind of lyrics we're talking about are totally one-sided and without any apparent moral consideration (other than empty bleating presumably derived from "some churchman says that god says it's baaaaad"), but is it neccessary for them to present a moral balance before they can be considered sufficiently thought-provoking? Maybe, but maybe not.

Regarding your proposal of the BNP paintings etc, I reckon such an abstract manner would be pretty much the only way of viewing them, since their face value would so obviously be contrary to any sensible person's moral outlook. Sure some minority might see them as advocating something horrible but again that really would say more about themselves than the painter and the paintings IMO.

Still here's hoping anyone who felt intimidated by such lyrics could find the courage and opportunity to talk about them with whatever MC was spitting them out and really see where they stood - maybe they wouldn't talk so big if they had to face the whipping-boy eh?

Oh, nono! No homophobic stuff.. at least not as far as I know.. it was more in response to the "fluffy" hiphop mentioned earlier in the thread by szc & others... I just find that whilst the views/personas of the 'nicer' artists are much closer to my own & to those of pple I'd be likely to get on well with, musically bad boys usually cut it a lot better musically.

I think this is the point - they simply want some badass lyric to fit their badass tune, so they take what is to them in their culture an easy target like homosexuality and bang on about it endlessly. Pretty unimaginative really but I guess it sounds less Babylonian than moaning about tories or traffic wardens... Still I agree it's long been pretty fucking boring hearing nothing but boomoutaway and batty this&that - maybe it's high time some other MCs and rappers spoke back, and we'd get to see who's really the brave ones - the bullys or those who stand up to them..!