I was in Community Newscenter (South U.) yesterday afternoon, and as I was
looking at some electronics magazines, my ears tuned in to the weird (as far
as I'm concerned) music they were playing throughout the store.
 
  I particularly caught one part of the lyrics -- "Why can't I get, just one
fuck."
 
   The place wasn't very crowded, but I looked around at other patrons anyway,
just to see if they had a reaction to the music. It wasn't apparent that
anyone did (although it probably wasn't apparent that I *did*).
 
   I'm not a prude, & it takes a lot to anger me, but I just really felt sad
that noone had apparently thought that song/album might not really be 
appropriate to play in a book store (which has a decent sized children's
book area).
 
   I realize that "fuck" is 'only' a word, just like "shoe" is a word, but I'd
like to think that even *I* share some similar societal values with Ann
Arbor people & places (especially a regular old bookstore).  Also, I think
case history with most of us shows that certain words are indeed offensive
to others.
 
   I was going to say something to the clerk at the cash register, but I
didn't.  I'm now thinking about writing a letter to the manager of
Community Newscenter, & sending a copy to other organizations (A2 &
Washtenaw County Prosecuting attorneys, A2 News,...).
 
  Should I care?

86 responses total.

  Not to the extent you do.  IMHO, the more Americans come to
accept sexuality as a normal and open part of human life, the
happier we'll be.  I expect hell to freeze over first.

 If it weren't for 'sexuality' being so incredibly vague --and varying--, I
might tend to support response 1.

My brother, for a while, played a song with that lyric incessantly.
Provided it is the same one, why no complaint about, "Why can't I
get, just one screw" -- presumably, not a complaint about blister
packaging in K-mart's hardware section.

If it offends your sensibilities, then you certainly should protest.
I think I tend to agree with you that those lyrics are not appropriate
for that time of day.

In general, however, the patrons of the Community Newscenters are
not the kind that would be offended by that kind of music.

It was inappropriate for them to play the lyric.  Video stores suffer from
the same lack of sensitivity when they play R rated movies with the same
language over the store monitors. And then there are those vulgar 
bumper stickers.......

go for it, Tim.

I walked into a video store, with a friend, and noticed a girl sticking in
a video, with her female associate.  I don't know if she meant to get my 
attention, but the movie was Stewardess School.  I don't believe she put it
in for my and my friend's edification...I think she conveyed her point well
enough...

I wouldn't be surprised if you get a favorable response, tim...

I think sending a copy of the letter to the News and the prosecutor's office
would be obnoxious, but one to the store would be fine.

 I suppose Mr. Dunkle is right. I don't want to be like what's her dame from
Bloomfield Hills (the good looking woman who created the stir over Married
With Children).
 
 Oh, I meant to say "name," & not "dame" (no, it wasn't a Freudian slip,
either).
  I'll get the name of the manager of CN, & I'd also like to go one level up
& cc: the letter to the owner of the CN chain.

Terry Rakolta?  Oh, her.
  
Why is it that, whenever somebody objects to a song, magazine, book,
article, whatever, that the existence of children is dragged into the
picture?

Judging from your prior responses in a prior item, you are more than well
equipped to answer THAT one.

  I'd be willing to bet that the song was "Add it Up" by the Violent Femmes,
a reasonably popular song at the time I was in high school.  It wouldn't
surprise me, therefore, if what you had heard was the radio tuned to some
station like CIMX that plays a fair amount of 80s "alternative" rock.  If 
that were the case it's likely enough that the store personnel had little
control over what was playing on the radio (other than to change the channel
or turn it off.)  Presumably, even if they were conscious enough to try to
safeguard their customers' sensibilities by changing the channel, they'd
wind up with something just as potentially offensive.  With a top-40 station
they'd probably wind up with "Gett Off" or "I Wanna Sex You Up" or, heaven
forbid, some heavy metal band.  A country station would be just as bad or 
worse, with seemingly most of the songs being about sex, alcohol, or marital
infidelity (or any combination/permutation thereof..)  

  Let's face it, if you want safe, sterilized music your best bet is to 
bring in a bunch of "Sing Along With Mitch" albums and insist that they 
play nothing else.  (Note that this is also the best bet for driving a 
store employee berzerk enough to cause them to try to bludgeon some customer
to death with a koosh or one of those "Learn to Play the Harmonica" kits.)

re  :10, I'm referring to the habit of justifying any dislike (especially
of anything with a sexual theme) by saying "But CHILDREN might hear/read/
see this!", without justifying exactly +what+ awful effect it will have.

   Exactly.  And it's part of what's behind our problems with
sexuality.  Too many people think that it is something we
have to keep a deep, dark secret from children.  Not that
they don't get plenty of exposure anyway -- but
it's as 'forbidden' matter when they do.

Mr. Tyler, you *are* a prude.

I've even heard him use the word "bitch" once.  Oh, wait, that's five
letters, not four.  I guess it's OK, then.

  In Tim's defense (oh god, has it actually come to that?) the song in 
question, if it's the one I'm thinking of, depicts a fairly callous and
self-centered (and not very healthy) view of sexual intercourse.  But I
doubt that Tim got much past the fact that the song contained the words
"fuck" and "screw".

How many publications in said venue contained the word "fuck"?

How many of these publications were available for reading/browsing
by youth under the age of 18?

Oh, come now, Craig.  Do you really think that "youths under the age of 18"
are not aware of this word's existence, even if they do not
use it themselves?

  I doubt he does.  He's just trying to point out how fraught with peril
a bookstore is for pure young minds even when they aren't playing obscene
and suggestive music.  It's a wonder the government doesn't raid them all
and shut them down.
,

   What I'm wondering is why the words 'fuck' and 'screw' are even
something we need to 'protect' younger people from.  After all, we
don't get all worked up about people saying 'beer', 'alcohol', or
'driving'.

...especially if all three words are in the same sentence.

This response has been erased.

 re #20:  You're probably going to keep on wondering that for a very long
time before you get an answer that makes sense.  It's just one of those
weird societal hangups.

What about the little kids that have to read your entry witha  4-letter
word, here?

  What about them?  It's not going to kill them or even cause them any
harm, in my opinion.  The number of small children who haven't been 
exposed to "profanity" has to be getting smaller and smaller every year.
If you're really concerned about "protecting" those who are left, why
don't you write a filter they can pipe their responses through?

(I think he was asking Tim Tyler)

   Tom, the words like "fuck" are worrysome to me, with regard to my son
Damon.  He is *just beginning* to understand about things like sexuality.
We haven't talked that much about it yet, principally because he hasn't
asked many questions yet.  But he know what fuck means, in the mechanical
sense I believe.  What would bother *me* about hearing that song in a
public place is Damon's hearing that, and thinking that its just another
thing that happens, *and that cruel language about sex is OK*.  Its not
the "word" that bothers me, but the way its used.  A song like _Maggie_
by Rod Stewart(?) about his older lover is a perfectly acceptable song
to me, and if damon hears it and asks questions about what "breaking my
bread" means, I'll tell him.  Its in the way the concept is presented
that concerns me.
   Tim, I'd call/write the headquarters of CN and complain.  You will
probably be the only one doing it, since a song doesn't hang around in
the air, but it will give them a kick in the head and let them know people
are aware of whats happening in their stores.

Actually, in complaining about the lyrics, Tim is in serious danger of
being a racist.  Y'see, certain groups commonly use that sort of
language, particularly in certainly types of intimate conversations.
I've heard it called "talking trash", and presumably, in the proper
context it's not nearly the objectionable noise it seems to us
uninitiated folks.

There are many groups that use 'obscenities' all the time in
normal speech, and not just ethnic groups, either.

   Actually, STeve, I think you have a good point.  You do want to
keep kids away from stuff that promotes an abusive and violent
world-view.  (I seriously wish you much good luck in doing so,
since it is unhappily common in our society.)  Let them find out
that kind of stuff when they are older.  I have no objection to
'demoting' violence.

Is it better to insist that all such songs be removed, or to explain
to the kid what they mean and why they are "bad"?  I don't know how
old I was when I first heard the term "fuck", but I wasn't +that+ old.

   Damon has already heard the word, so early in fact that it must have
been at the Gerber drop-off daycare back in '86 or so.  So yes, he knows
the "bad words".  That isn't the point: its the callous way that its used
that I'd *like* to protect him from.  Kids don't have nearly enough time to
be kids anymore, I'm afraid.
   I'll let people know how this works out, say in about 6 years.

I would tend to agree with Laurel on this one, steve -- "protecting"
children from the way words are used is not the answer.  *Educating* them
about why this usage is callous and can offend people is the far
superior solution.

On the other hand, the store should also be aware of the fact that such
words *do* offend people, and should take that seriously.  If nothing else,
it's good business sense.

It's rather easy to find things that portray abusive and violent world
views that don't use all those naughty words, & not impossible to find
things that use those naughty words without the black world view.  If
the concern is promoting a better world view, a better way might be to
provide lots of more positive role models, and work also to develope a
sense of appreciation for the kinds of feedback one can get from one's
world-view.  (Ie, one finds what one is looking for...)

Actually, the # one resource where abusive and violent world views are
shown is certainly TV, and that's rather interesting considering that
those naughty words have historically been forbidden.  There are even
studies that show that watching lots of TV makes people more paranoid &
afraid of the world, tending more to overestimate the prevelance of
crime and so forth.  It's kind of a shame, actually, as there is also
quality TV worth watching, it just takes a bit of effort to find it.

People were really shocked when the watergate tapes came out.  Seems
that our president couldn't utter one normal sentence in private
conversation without at least one or two dirty words.

There are other cultures that have no dirty words.  Many north american
indian languages, for instance.  Indulging in some good old
drunk-country-boy thinking, that's certainly interesting.  Perhaps dirty
words are a result of the christian church imposing taboos from afar? Or
perhaps it's a result of having large and diverse enough cultural
sub-groups sharing a common language that what's normal to one group
isn't normal to another? Whatever the reason is, there is something
rather attractive about a culture that never found any need to invent
dirty words.

So far as music is concerned, this sort of thing seems almost
inevitable.  Today, Rap music is almost universally dispised and
regarded as an instrument of the devil, not the least of it being the
language used.  In the 50's, rock music was almost universally despised
and regarded as the world of the devil.  I have no doubt that Jazz,
before that, was equally disreputable, although the presence of
prohibition may have effectively distracted any active opposition.
People were probably too busy sneaking drinks to complain about the
music in those speakeasies.  It's interesting, too, that all of these
musical forms owe a lot to black culture -- jazz and rap being
practically invented by the blacks.  Evidently, there is something about
modern white culture that discourages active inovation, and prefers to
"borrow" from elsewhere, at least when it comes to music.

I find it *extremely* difficult to believe that *any* culture has *no*
taboo words at all.  Many studies have been done on this phenomenon,
and there are cultures which have vastly *different* taboo words than
ours (if you think about it, most of the "dirty words" in English have
to do with sex, urination, and defecation, with a scant few having to
do with religion), but I can not imagine a culture with no such words
at *all*.  Where did you find this piece of information, Marcus?

Maybe you don't remember this, Jennie, but certainly when I was a boy, no
respectable newspaper would print the words "Hell" or "damn."  Surely
those are religious-based taboos, which were taken seriously within human
memory, even if no longer.

Yes, and I mentioned the religious-based taboos in my message.  What's
your point?

This response has been erased.

Re 37.  Sorry, I misread your response -- I thought you wrote there were
NO religious-based taboo words in English.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss