celeb news Kendrick uses F-slur in song

[LoveInStereo]

21 pages for a line that was included to speak to the realities of true life.. embarrassing. Confirms for me this has always been a forum for popular culture & not art/music bc this isn’t **** to clutch your pearls over

[Bloo]

If you're straight, just don't say the f-slur. It's not difficult, I swear.

[Ampersand13]

2 minutes ago, LoveInStereo said:

21 pages for a line that was included to speak to the realities of true life.. embarrassing. Confirms for me this has always been a forum for popular culture & not art/music bc this isn’t **** to clutch your pearls over

Art is meant to be subjective by definition. I don’t condone a lot of what’s being said in this thread but simply invalidating every single opinion other than your own demonstrates a willful aversion to interpretation. If people are genuinely hurt by this I don’t see what the problem with them voicing their opinion respectfully is.

 

I am personally not outraged, and anyone trying to compare two slurs needs to be put in their place. I do think, however, queer people are entitled to having an opinion on who can use a very hurtful slur. 

[americanlife]

The amount of pages

[Bloo]

7 minutes ago, Ampersand13 said:

I am personally not outraged, and anyone trying to compare two slurs needs to be put in their place. I do think, however, queer people are entitled to having an opinion on who can use a very hurtful slur. 

I think some of the comparisons are not nuanced but I think the aim is reasonable. Frankly. The N-word is obviously an evil word that was created to terrorize and dehumanize Black people. But it's also a word that now has strong societal disincentive to use it. It's a big social no-no to say that word for anyone that is not Black. Unfortunately, the F-word does not have the same type of respect and this song plainly demonstrates that. I think as we see words like the R-word begin to also garner similar social attitudes to not say it because of its harmful stigmatization, it only makes sense to expect the same for the F-word. Which is interesting because the R-word was originally the politically correct medical term to combat the negative stigmatization of the word "spaz" but it's now since been heavily stigmatized into this awful word we shouldn't use to describe others. The culture surrounding the word has evolved and it's now being seen as a word one shouldn't say to describe others. I think it's fair for queer people to expect similar treatment of the F-word — especially given its longer history of being a horrible slur against a marginalized community than the R-word. It's been long enough for society to embrace this basic tenant of simply not saying the word. We have enough language to discuss homophobia and growing beyond it (what Kendrick's song intended) without saying that word.

 

I think people bringing up the N-word simply want the F-word to gain social disincentive. I think that's a valid point and shouldn't be interpreted as a game of oppression olympics where one group is saying the other has had it objectively worse. I hate that game. It's not helpful. It's not constructive. But, that's why I think people are bringing it up (albeit not in the most nuanced way).

[Losing my ground]

It's ok in this context because he's not trying to offend someone.

 

So should be OK to use other "slurs" in appropriate contexts, but people from the US aren't ready for that conversation. They prefer to keep systemic racism going as long no one says one word.

Edited May 13, 2022 by Losing my ground

[L.B GAGA]

9 hours ago, bad guy said:

They're just dense, or slow, or both 

 

The n-word is much different than the f- word. I thought this was common knowledge. 

As a black gay man you are pissing me off with this tone deaf comment. They are both the same. 

 

Never forget that the Black lgbtq community faces the most hate attacks from the black straight community. To forget that the word F*** is in reality an expression of the demeaning nature, intentional economic deprivation, murder and violence that the str8t black community still uses to oppress most of us.  Recall Kevin hart saying he'd kill his gay son. The black trans women killed each day even as they drive home to their hood. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by L.B GAGA

[WildHeart]

1 hour ago, GoodGuyGoneGhetto said:

1) There was no personal attack.

 

2) There was no hypocrisy.

 

Again, it’s been a week…

 

 

Trying to drag people (post *edit*) for calling their faves gay allies for doing the bare minimum while calling an artist gay ally for a song about accepting trans family member and not being transphobic (which also drops the *** 9 times in it) is... the definition of hypocrisy. 

And yeah, your *edit* with *OT* was late. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by Artistofthedecade

[lostcause]

20 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Anyone here who is Queer and Black/a person of color will NEVER tell you that you can compare the two. Not saying Kendrick is allowed to use a slur cause I personally don't think Non-queer people should be able to use the word, but context is different. Racial slurs vs homophobic slurs cannot be compared. 

Anytime someone argues these two slurs aren’t comparable it only proves they take the struggle of one marginalized group more seriously than that of the other. Both are the last words heard by countless hate crime victims. Both have been used to degrade their target and maintain the “superiority” of the oppressor. Both slurs apply to groups who’s oppression was and is institutionalized. One slur is not more valid than the other unless you value the lives of one group more than the other.

 

 

I really do like the song. I think it’s thoughtful and well done. I think it’s targeted at cis-straight people facing their own prejudice, and I think the storytelling is very moving. Some of his fans have been reading it as some pinnacle of allyship, but I think that misses the point Kendrick is making. He is not preaching, he’s exposing his journey towards understanding + love, and he still has more to learn. The slur is the only aspect I find clunky. I think there are countless ways Kendrick could have told the story without him saying it 10 times. For example, he could have featured the voice of his cousin, his uncle or a queer/trans artist in place of his own for those refrains alone. Without changing a single lyric, the message would be the same, and he would be honoring the voices of people his past ignorance affected.  I believe art is a space to explore language openly, but this song is also extremely personal. It is him saying these words, not a character. Therefore there is irony in his use of the slur in a song about him personally learning that he should not use the word. At the same time it’s a beautiful and moving song, and hopefully it creates important and positive conversation.

[Ampersand13]

4 minutes ago, Bloo said:

I think some of the comparisons are not nuanced but I think the aim is reasonable. Frankly. The N-word is obviously an evil word that was created to terrorize and dehumanize Black people. But it's also a word that now has strong societal disincentive to use it. It's a big social no-no to say that word for anyone that is not Black. Unfortunately, the *** does not have the same type of respect and this song plainly demonstrates that. I think as we see words like the R-word begin to also garner similar social attitudes to not say it because of its harmful stigmatization, it only makes sense to expect the same for the ***. Which is interesting because the R-word was originally the politically correct medical term to combat the negative stigmatization of the word "spaz" but it's now since been heavily stigmatized into this awful word we shouldn't use to describe others. The culture surrounding the word has evolved and it's now being seen as a word one shouldn't say to describe others. I think it's fair for queer people to expect similar treatment of the *** — especially given its longer history of being a horrible slur against a marginalized community than the R-word. It's been long enough for society to embrace this basic tenant of simply not saying the word. We have enough language to discuss homophobia and growing beyond it (what Kendrick's song intended) without saying that word.

 

I think people bringing up the N-word simply want the *** to gain social disincentive. I think that's a valid point and shouldn't be interpreted as a game of oppression olympics where one group is saying the other has had it objectively worse. I hate that game. It's not helpful. It's not constructive. But, that's why I think people are bringing it up (albeit not in the most nuanced way).

Thank you for putting in the time to write something so thoughtful, nuanced, and educative! I think I understand what you’re saying. I think I saw comment comparing the two as one and the same which didn’t sit well with me, but I completely agree with where you’re coming from.

 

The first comment I wrote in this thread asked a question similar to one of your points, could the song’s intentions remain intact without using the word and I think the answer is obviously yes which makes its inclusion that much more perplexing. 

[MAKSIM]

22 minutes ago, LoveInStereo said:

21 pages for a line that was included to speak to the realities of true life.. embarrassing. Confirms for me this has always been a forum for popular culture & not art/music bc this isn’t **** to clutch your pearls over

Art gets critiqued. No one is cancelling Kendrick and he will still be richer than us all combined. If you include a line for shock value, it’s no surprise that people will be shocked and discuss it…especially on a forum that is mostly lgbtq+. 
 

Also, we don’t need to idolize and make Kendrick to be a hero when he is “breaking barriers” by releasing a pro-lgbtq song in 2022. Like it’s the bare minimum to accept your family and not be homophobic and transphobic. I’m not giving stars or applause to any person, industry, country, group of people, etc. that finally accept the worth of gay and trans people. 
 

Most people in the thread are fans of at least some of Kendrick’s work, can see that he had different intentions, but don’t support him commercializing the use of a slur multiple times. Even if it was for art’s sake, it feels excessive and gratuitous by the amount of times used. 
 

Im not going to hate someone cause they used a word I don’t like when I think they have good intentions, but I still want it to be clearly known that it doesn’t make me comfortable. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by MAKSIM

[Elusive Chanteuse]

Context is important so not sure why ppl would be offended. 

[mypaintoyou]

I listen to Eminem so it’s not bad

and I like Kendrick 

[Bloo]

2 minutes ago, Ampersand13 said:

Thank you for putting in the time to write something so thoughtful, nuanced, and educative! I think I understand what you’re saying. I think I saw comment comparing the two as one and the same which didn’t sit well with me, but I completely agree with where you’re coming from.

 

The first comment I wrote in this thread asked a question similar to one of your points, could the song’s intentions remain intact without using the word and I think the answer is obviously yes which makes its inclusion that much more perplexing. 

Yes. Kendrick is a very talented artist and I think he is creative enough to very easily come up with an emotionally-charged song to combat homophobia without using the f-slur. I'm happy he's wanting to use his voice and platform to call out homophobia, but people have every right to criticize the execution when a cishet artist is using a word they shouldn't.

 

I hope he takes whatever pushback he sees to heart and doesn't respond with anger but reflects upon the stigma of the word itself. We'll see.

 

I think my biggest frustration are the people that still are suggesting the f-slur being extremely negative is a new thing.  

[Ampersand13]

1 minute ago, Elusive Chanteuse said:

Context is important so not sure why ppl would be offended. 

There are people who have been really hurt and traumatized by that slur. I’m not saying I’m like super angry at Kendrick or anything like that but why are people in this thread asking others to explain their hurt? That slur can be triggering for a variety of reasons. If someone says they are hurt I don’t think they necessarily need to explain why it hurts (unless there’s an ulterior motive)

[Ampersand13]

2 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Yes. Kendrick is a very talented artist and I think he is creative enough to very easily come up with an emotionally-charged song to combat homophobia without using the f-slur. I'm happy he's wanting to use his voice and platform to call out homophobia, but people have every right to criticize the execution when a cishet artist is using a word they shouldn't.

 

I hope he takes whatever pushback he sees to heart and doesn't respond with anger but reflects upon the stigma of the word itself. We'll see.

 

I think my biggest frustration are the people that still are suggesting the f-slur being extremely negative is a new thing.  

All of this whew

[Kool_Aid_King]

8 minutes ago, lostcause said:

Anytime someone argues these two slurs aren’t comparable it only proves they take the struggle of one marginalized group more seriously than that of the other. Both are the last words heard by countless hate crime victims. Both have been used to degrade their target and maintain the “superiority” of the oppressor. Both slurs apply to groups who’s oppression was and is institutionalized. One slur is not more valid than the other unless you value the lives of one group more than the other.

 

 

I really do like the song. I think it’s thoughtful and well done. I think it’s targeted at cis-straight people facing their own prejudice, and I think the storytelling is very moving. Some of his fans have been reading it as some pinnacle of allyship, but I think that misses the point Kendrick is making. He is not preaching, he’s exposing his journey towards understanding + love, and he still has more to learn. The slur is the only aspect I find clunky. I think there are countless ways Kendrick could have told the story without him saying it 10 times. For example, he could have featured the voice of his cousin, his uncle or a queer/trans artist in place of his own for those refrains alone. Without changing a single lyric, the message would be the same, and he would be honoring the voices of people his past ignorance affected.  I believe art is a space to explore language openly, but this song is also extremely personal. It is him saying these words, not a character. Therefore there is irony in his use of the slur in a song about him personally learning that he should not use the word. At the same time it’s a beautiful and moving song, and hopefully it creates important and positive conversation.

I definitely see where you're coming from, but I just think the struggle one group faces is obviously very different, which is why I said it can't be compared the way it has in this group by some non-POC queer people. In the instance you're saying, sure when it comes to death/abuse. 

 

But I agree with everything you're saying in the last paragraph. I do think it could've added if he had someone else use it, but as you also pointed it would've taken away from the message and the point he was trying to make. I don't think he used the word in a negative context and as you said, it created an important and positive conversation. 

[yonsé]

1 hour ago, OnlyRealMusic. said:

The album hasn't even been out for 24hrs. Your opinion is mid.

lol i don't care what you think of my opinion babe. that's why it's mine.

[Daddy]

53 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Racial slurs vs homophobic slurs cannot be compared. 

- Both often the last thing these people heard before they were hate crimed/killed

 

- Used to discriminate and dehumanise a minority

 

- Both used on people for something they can't change or control

 

- Both reclaimed

 

 

 

[Jotham]

15 minutes ago, lostcause said:

I really do like the song. I think it’s thoughtful and well done. I think it’s targeted at cis-straight people facing their own prejudice, and I think the storytelling is very moving. Some of his fans have been reading it as some pinnacle of allyship, but I think that misses the point Kendrick is making. He is not preaching, he’s exposing his journey towards understanding + love, and he still has more to learn. The slur is the only aspect I find clunky. I think there are countless ways Kendrick could have told the story without him saying it 10 times. For example, he could have featured the voice of his cousin, his uncle or a queer/trans artist in place of his own for those refrains alone. Without changing a single lyric, the message would be the same, and he would be honoring the voices of people his past ignorance affected.  I believe art is a space to explore language openly, but this song is also extremely personal. It is him saying these words, not a character. Therefore there is irony in his use of the slur in a song about him personally learning that he should not use the word. At the same time it’s a beautiful and moving song, and hopefully it creates important and positive conversation.

This is probably the best take on the thread imo.

 

Even though the song is about Kendrick's personal journey, I would have really liked to see an LGBT+ artist narrate the the song when Kendrick is talking about the past. While I'm personally not offended, I don't think Kendrick's use of the slur was necessary for the song.

 

With that said, I think the song is phenomenal and has a very powerful message, and it's very hard to ignore this once you consider the overall context and lyrical context of the song.

[yonsé]

58 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Anyone here who is Queer and Black/a person of color will NEVER tell you that you can compare the two. Not saying Kendrick is allowed to use a slur cause I personally don't think Non-queer people should be able to use the word, but context is different. Racial slurs vs homophobic slurs cannot be compared. 

this is hyperbole. as a queer black person i can easily find the intersection of the two slurs. no one is saying they're the exact same.

 

but kendrick is drawing comparisons to them in the song itself, which is what started the dialogue to begin with.

Edited May 13, 2022 by yonsé

[rzal]

55 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Anyone here who is Queer and Black/a person of color will NEVER tell you that you can compare the two. Not saying Kendrick is allowed to use a slur cause I personally don't think Non-queer people should be able to use the word, but context is different. Racial slurs vs homophobic slurs cannot be compared. 

Quote

You said, "Kendrick, ain't no room for contradiction
To truly understand love, switch position
'******, ******, ******,' we can say it together
But only if you let a white girl say '*****'"

it's literally compared in the song? a quote by a trans black man? 

[Abracadabra]

Can some of y'all please learn how to have a mature nuanced debate without resorting to the tired "you need to love yourselves" narrative... it's ironic that gaslighting keeps getting brought up because that in itself is gaslighting. If someone has an opinion that differs from yours, they must not love themselves enough. It's not that black and white, and it just seems like a cheap way of trying to censor and shame other LGBTQ people into not expressing their opinion.

[Hephaestus]

17 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

I definitely see where you're coming from, but I just think the struggle one group faces is obviously very different, which is why I said it can't be compared the way it has in this group by some non-POC queer people. In the instance you're saying, sure when it comes to death/abuse. 

You're right on one thing: they're absolutely not comparable and that's because homo/transphobia are way more widespread than racism in countries outside of the US. In some parts of the world it's literally illegal to be LGBTQ+, and the punishments for it go from jail to death. I really don't want to make this a "oh this issue is bigger than the other" since we're talking about people suffering on both cases, but just to point out that while racism might be more prominent some countries more than others, homo/transphobia is literally everywhere, no matter the skin color, sex and gender. If we condemn the use of the n-word, the bare minimum is to do the same with the ***.

[WildHeart]

3 hours ago, BILLIONAIRE✘BOY said:

It doesnt have to change, the song isnt changing either so..yeah build that bridge when you stop crying. 

 

Whether they look it up or not doesnt matter, the message is the same and doesnt change for the small minded so ..

 

3 hours ago, BILLIONAIRE✘BOY said:

Maybe you all could build a time machine and change the song? Until then... maybe put out your own music addressing the issue? Or do anything?

People who are part of the LGBTQ community can voice their criticism about straight man using the f-slur however they want so stop gaslighting people and try to tell them how they should feel about the topic. 

You are only embarrassing yourself more and more. 

 

3 hours ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

I’m not going to engage with people who are defending a straight man using a gay slur, but I do want to just generally apologize to any gay people reading this who have to, on a forum comprised primarily of LGBTQ+ people, defend being offended by it. Y’all are being gaslit and it’s really sad. I honestly didn’t expect people would be grasping at straws to defend this pretending that “context” is ok.

 

We all know that other marginalized communities get extended far more empathy when people use slurs against them in any “context”, and despite the exact same logic, people want to gaslit LGBTQ+ people into thinking it’s “not the same.” It’s the exact same logic whether people want to admit it or not. It’s so disheartening to read people grasping at straws to defend this, as well as people having to defend why they’re offended by the use of a slur used seven times.   
 

 

Edited May 13, 2022 by Artistofthedecade