MOTION #82: THIS HOUSE BELIEVES
THAT MUSIC THAT GLORIFIES VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN SHOULD BE BANNED
Violence against women
is one of the most widespread human rights abuses affecting the world today.
Every day, thousands of women and girls are abused and murdered by their
families, raped in armed conflicts and attacked for defending woman's rights.
Many believe there are still violent undercurrents, such as the depiction of
violence towards women in some music, which have not allowed women to be truly
free from detrimental social norms. Simply stating that VAW (violence against
women) is wrong and dealing with situations one by one as they occur is no
longer an option as it is such a widespread phenomenon. Violence against women
in music is now a global phenomenon, and is common in many of the world's most
famous artists. The problem has become even more widespread thanks to the
advancements in technology, and in particular the internet which allows the
access and sharing of this style of music all over the world. While in most
countries films (and to an extent TV shows) are given age ratings such as
universal, 12A or R in order to suggest what age group are mature enough to
deal with its content, however, so far such a rating system has not been
created for music, meaning people of all ages are exposed to many violent
images they would not have access to via other forms of media.2 Yet music
videos depicting violence towards women exist and are often unrated, such as
Eminem and Rhianna's 'Love the way you lie'. This, combined with the ever
increasing use of the internet to obtain and share music, shows that there are
inconsistencies between the expectations and restrictions put on music and
music videos and the expectations and restrictions placed on other forms of
media. Also due to common ownership of mp3 players, radios and computing
equipment it is harder than ever to keep track of what music children/ young
people are listening too. Often genres such as rap and hip-hop are blamed for
these misogynistic lyrics, but there are a huge range of songs depicted
violence against women from rap to rock to county, and in America, France, the
UK and many more (see scrapbook for examples). The discussion of whether music
depicting violence against women should be banned creates a platform so that we
can begin to discuss if all music depicting any crimes should be banned.
Note: In order to illustrate the examples of violent language towards women
in music involves directly quoting from the original source. In many cases this
means the examples contain strong and violent language that some may find
offensive. However, it seems necessary to keep this language intact in order to
properly quote from the source, and also in order to illustrate the extreme
nature of violence towards women that is prevalent in these songs.
Pros
|
Cons
|
This type of music is degrading to everyone, not just
women. While music depicting violence towards women appears
on the surface to only demean women, it can be offensive and degrading to a
range of people. One popular culture reference to a situation like this comes
from the British television show called The Office, in the episode 'Merger'.
In this episode the character David Brent tells a racist joke and while this
did not offend the black character present, many other characters were still
offended by this joke.
People may be offended by the ideas behind the music,
as it seems that people who glorify violence towards women in song appear to
think that this violence is acceptable. Men could be offended by these ideas
just as much as women might. As songs like this become 'mainstream' in some
cultures, everybody in that culture becomes affected by it, and some men and
women may feel degraded by this association. Finally some people may argue
that the person who writes and/or sings lyric that depict violence towards women
degrade themselves in this act.
|
The issue of whether music is degrading to women or any
other demography in society is irrelevant to the question of whether it
encourages violence or aggression towards women. In fact, the proposition
undermines itself through this claim by suggesting that this music should
encourage violence to all segments of society; should we therefore ban all
music?
|
Music depicting violence to women causes and sustains
the cycle of violence. Music depicting
violence to women causes and sustains the cycle of violence. The Scottish
Home Affairs correspondent Lucy Adams reported in 2005 the levels of domestic
abuse committed by 16-18 year olds grew by around 70%. One of the reasons
suggested for this dramatic raise is the culture of music that depicts and
glorifies violence towards women (heraldscotland.com). Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology reports that a study conducted in a variety of US
states illustrated that music that depicted acts of violence 'led to more
aggressive interpretations of ambiguously aggressive words, increased the
relative speed with which people read aggressive vs. nonaggressive words,
[...]The violent songs increased feelings of hostility without provocation or
threat'. Although they are quick to assure that it is NOT the music type that
has this affect, it is simply the lyrics, as even humorous aggressive songs
have this effect. They conclude with the idea that 'Repeated exposure to
violent lyrics may contribute to the development of an aggressive personality'
and thus lead to more aggressive behaviour. While currently there is little
to no research specifically on the link between domestic violence and lyrics
that depict abuse to women, the current information that we have on violence
and music lyrics suggests we can expect a similar effect. Thus if we were to
ban music depicting violence towards women, people could not be influenced by
it and levels of violence would drop.
|
Violence towards women is a common and world-wide
phenomenon, occurring on every continent and throughout history. Therefore it
seems crazy to suggest that levels of domestic violence are related to this
small sub-culture of music that depicts violence towards women. If we are
arguing that it exposes people to situations where they hear (in lyrics) or
see (in music videos) then it could be countered that if anything this music
is just highlighting these incidences of violence that are still occurring
and we might as well ban the news or television drama as they expose people
just as much without an age reference.
|
It would be easy to apply restrictions on music. We already give films, DVD's and games an age
appropriate rating. In the United States, the Motion Picture Association of
America is charged with the responsibility of providing ratings to consumers.
It would seem that it would be simple to stretch these
criteria to a similar music body. Therefore people would only be subjected to
violent lyrics when it is deemed they are old enough to hear or buy this
material, and it would stop younger people from being exposed to this kind of
music. This also means that no new state-run institution needs to be created;
it would operate, like the MPAA, independently of government control. As
such, claims that any form of music censorship would suffer from practical
problems are short-sighted, we simply need to extend the medium that already
exists.
|
The difficulty with this is that games, DVD's and films
are all very visual medium, whereas music is audible and arguably a more
imaginative medium. Other non-visual mediums, such as literature, are not
restricted by age ratings and therefore it seems unfair to restrict music on
these grounds.
|
Music depicting violence against women encourages men
(and women) not to respect women. Asha Jennings began a boycott of misogynistic music in hip-hop,
resulting in the 'take back the music' campaign supported by essence
magazine. Jennings claims that this type of rap/ hip hop music is 'telling
people [black women] are bitches and hos and sluts and not worthy of respect
[...] And that's exactly how society is treating us'1. She continues that
images of women 'tends to be objectified, degrading, very stripper-like' or
as nagging vicious and manipulative money grabbers1. Jennings' worry is that
in these videos women are depicted as menial, subservient and purely as the
object of men's entertainment. The lyrics that go with these music videos
compound these ideas of women as undeserving of male respect e.g. 'wouldn't
piss on fire to put you out' (Eminem), 'Then I straight smoked the ho [...]
and she thanked me' (NWE) (All lyrics in full are in the scrapbook). These
images in themselves are violence towards women, as they dehumanise them. As
this becomes a dominant image in society, young people who look up to these
rappers mimic their behaviour and believe it is ok to disrespect women, as
that is what they have been exposed to. This works in the same way for young
girls, who cannot relate to the male rappers and so instead mimic the women
they talk about, while also following their views on women. This idea that
women are not deserving of respect must affect the levels of violence towards
women as if you abuse someone you cannot fully respect them. Therefore if
music depicting violence (and for this argument, disrespect) towards women
was banned, then violence towards women in the real world would be reduced
and this must be seen as a good thing.
|
Music depicting
violence against women encourages men (and women) not to respect women. Asha
Jennings began a boycott of misogynistic music in hip-hop, resulting in the
'take back the music' campaign supported by essence magazine. Jennings claims
that this type of rap/ hip hop music is 'telling people [black women] are
bitches and hos and sluts and not worthy of respect [...] And that's exactly
how society is treating us'. She continues that images of women 'tends to be
objectified, degrading, very stripper-like' or as nagging vicious and
manipulative money grabbers. Jennings' worry is that in these videos women
are depicted as menial, subservient and purely as the object of men's
entertainment. The lyrics that go with these music videos compound these
ideas of women as undeserving of male respect e.g. 'wouldn't piss on fire to
put you out' (Eminem), 'Then I straight smoked the ho [...] and she thanked
me' (NWE) (All lyrics in full are in the scrapbook). These images in
themselves are violence towards women, as they dehumanise them. As this
becomes a dominant image in society, young people who look up to these
rappers mimic their behaviour and believe it is ok to disrespect women,2 as
that is what they have been exposed to. This works in the same way for young
girls, who cannot relate to the male rappers and so instead mimic the women
they talk about, while also following their views on women. This idea that
women are not deserving of respect must affect the levels of violence towards
women as if you abuse someone you cannot fully respect them. Therefore if
music depicting violence (and for this argument, disrespect) towards women
was banned, then violence towards women in the real world would be reduced
and this must be seen as a good thing.
|
None of these arguments pose a significant problem.
While setting criteria may be difficult and there will always be cases where
it is a matter of interpretation this is not a reason not to create a strict
and detailed set of criteria. There could be an appeals process to make sure
that a song is not banned based purely on one individual's opinion.
That a ban on recording and selling the music could be
avoided through pirating or songs being passed down orally does not matter as
if this was happening the ban would already have enough of an impact. The ban
does not have to be totally comprehensive in order to have the desired effect
of reducing violence towards women simply that it prevents many people
listening to the music. The audience would be reduced to a tiny minority and
those who remain would be aware of the lyrics as they would have to
specifically seek out the music rather than simply being exposed to it with
little thought of what it may contain.
Finally there is unlikely to be a large forbidden fruit
effect, some people may want to try it in order to find out what it is like.
But unlike for example drugs there are direct substitutes that would be
almost exactly the same but without the violent lyrics so there is little
point in going to the extra effort to get illegal versions.
|
It would be highly
impractical to ban this music glorifying violence. There are many reasons it would be impractical to ban
certain types of music: First, who would choose what music counts as
inappropriate and on what criteria? This would include concerns such as the
Rolling Stone's song, 'Brown Sugar' which depicts sexual violence towards a
slave by a slave owner (see scrapbook). It would be up to this censor to
assert whether this song is highlighting and mocking a distressing moment in
history, or whether it is glorifying this incident or merely describing it
with no moral judgement. The censor would also have to then choose which of
these where fitting reasons to ban the song. This is just a matter of opinion
and thus no-one can be unbiased in making a decision. If this is true then it
seems that no-one should have the right of it over someone else's opinion.
Second while there
could be a ban made on recording or selling songs that depict violence
towards women, or prohibit them being played on the radio, with current
technological advances it would be very difficult to enforce a total ban.
Music is widely available on thousands of websites via video/internet radio
etc. More basically, music is a very communal activity and people may sing in
crowds or to each other. Country songs (as a genre) have one of the highest
percentages of music depicting violence towards women, and these songs tend
to have an oral history. Thus even if there was a ban on new songs being
recorded, these old songs would continue to be heard and new songs may be
heard to a smaller audience. Thus people would still be exposed to these
lyrics of women being abused in music.
The final reason it would be difficult to ban music
that depicts violence towards women is that this runs a risk that this will
only encourage musicians to write such songs, which become more popular for
being 'forbidden fruit'.
|
To ban music that encourages violence against women
would be done with the intention of protecting women; if it is necessary to
paint them as the victims of violence that they are, that is a small price to
pay. Furthermore, bans on child pornography would not be met with claims that
their ban merely encourages the view of children as victims (as an argument
against the practise). Why is that any different in this case?
|
To ban this type of
music encourages the viewing of women as helpless, victim figures. Many feminists criticise the idea of banning music
that glorifies violence against women, as they perpetuate the idea of women
as helpless victims who cannot cope with male criticism or violent language.
One such group of people are 'power feminists' These power feminists believe
that by complaining that men are depicting violent language towards women,
and attempting to get this banned, the gender stereotype of women as a victim
is reinforced; thus undoing any feminist progress that tries to assert men
and women are equals. Power feminists believe that instead women should take
this language in hand, assert/ defend themselves and retaliate in order to
state that women are equals to those who produce this violent music.
|
However, while freedom of expression is definitely an
important concept to consider, such freedoms can only go so far. When it
comes to language that promotes violence then freedom of expression is no
longer sufficient reason not to ban something as a physical harm outweighs
the right to freedom of expression. Many countries such as Canada, England,
France, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, Australia and India ban hate
speech because it has severely damaging effects injuring people's dignity,
feelings and self-respect and potentially promoting violence.1 Similarly, if
we accept the arguments in the proposition arguments above, and we believe
that this type of music can be harmful, then it seems that perhaps freedom of
speech can be over ridden in order to protect those that this music injures
(i.e. some women). Furthermore the banning of music which glorifies violence
towards women may perhaps overtime lead to people's attitude toward this
style of lyrics changing, and therefore any harmful attitude that arise from
it may begin to be unacceptable by the majority.
|
We desire freedom of
expression. Many of those who
argue that censorship of music depicting violence towards women would be a
bad thing do so on libertarian grounds. That is, they believe that to
restrict the creation, circulation and consumption of this type of music
would result in a restriction of people's freedom of speech/ expression. As
some people enjoy and relate to the type of music that depicts these images,
to deny people the right to listen to this music is to unfairly restrict
their enjoyment and marginalise their tastes.
Some people take this further to say that morbidity is
part of the human condition. A consequence of our highly developed brains is
that we become very conscious of our mortality, we become fascinated with
violence as well because it is so closely linked to death, and we all want to
understand death, we all want to know what happens after we die. So people
end up seeking different ways of dealing with their fear of death, and one
common way is desensitizing ourselves to the idea, perhaps through subjecting
ourselves to an environment awash with death, i.e. music that depicts
violence. This obviously extends to the creative aspect of humanity as well.
We all spend a lot of time thinking about violence, so it is not really
surprising that the most creative of us end up making art about it. From
paintings, to music, to theatre, we are obsessed with violence in our
entertainment, even gratuitous violence. We have famous painters like
Francisco Goya who invoke gruesome violence for effect1 and who also receive
critical acclaim; Stanley Kubrick won an Oscar nomination for directing A
Clockwork Orange, a movie rampant with violence, sexuality and misogyny. Both
these examples show violent art which have had both critical and commercial
success. Therefore for the proposition argument to successfully defend the
banning of music depicting violence towards women it would seem that we would
equally have to ban films and paintings that display similar themes. This
would result in a huge restriction of expression and society would
potentially loose a vast amount of creative output. Furthermore from the
examples given above it would seem that a ban would go against popular desire.
|
No 'slippery slope' situation exists. It would be clear
that the ban only applies to music that glorifies violence. This is not a
justification that could be infinitely expanded to cover more and more music
and art. It could not be considered a precedent to ban music with a political
message as most political messages do not promote violence.
Far from stifling creativity it is likely to stimulate
it. Artists would need to find new styles of music and would attempt to find
ways around the ban while still keeping their music as near to its previous
style as possible.
|
The 'Slippery-Slope'
Argument. Banning music that glorifies
violence is at risk of the 'slippery-slope' of censorship, which occurs on
two levels. Firstly that while music depicting violence towards women may be
banned for the best intentions, this censorship may end up extending to other
unpopular pieces of art, literature, film or news stories. It may follow that
once music depicting violence is banned, that definition of violence may be
expanded, afterwards that it is easier to ban songs that contain a political
message as there is already precedent. While it is unlikely that it would
ever be carried to such an extreme this could continue, until simply anything
that is disliked by those in control of the banning is prohibited. It may
also discourage people to say or publish expressions of their own for fear of
them being considered pornography and being prosecuted1. Equally likely would
be the spread of such bans to other forms of media as mentioned in opposition
argument one.The second concern of the 'slippery slope' argument is that
banning this type of music may cause a stagnation of creative output as
people are scared to produce any music that might be considered offensive.
This might result in no new styles of music being created and thus styles of
music may begin to become torpid.
|
0 Comments