Is Andrew Schulz trolling or does he have a point?

L0Qutus

All Star
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
980
Reputation
470
Daps
7,569
The Migos also have a legion of followers that listen to what they say but somehow they have no responsibility to the public because "entertainers".
You act as if the Black community was doing better until gangsta rap and trap music came on the scene. According to you, somehow black people lack the ability to separate entertainment from reality unlike white people who are able to ingest all forms of entertainment (including entertainment that celebrates criminals) with no deleterious effects.

The Black community is in its position b/c of fukked up racist gov't policies not fukking rap music. Was everything going better until Straight Outta Compton Dropped in 1988 and ushered in the gangsta rap genre into the mainstream?

If trap music is so harmful then violence should have worsened over the 90's right right up until now:
Violent-Crime-Rate-Chart1.png

Murder-Rate-Chart.png


If the misogyny in rap music was so harmful for Black people you might think it would lead to more sexually irresponsible behavior and result in more black teen pregnancy...
Figure 1: Birth rates per 1,000 females ages 15-19, by race/ethnicity, 1990-2014
2014_figure_1_teen_birth_rates_per_1000_females_ages_15_to_19_by_race_ethnicity.jpg


"Other" people (and some of our own) are always trying to ascribe some pathology to Black people when other races engage in the same or similar behavior.

Does ANYONE really believe that if gangsta rap/trap music NEVER EXISTED the Black community wouldn't be in the EXACT SAME POSITION it's in right now?
 

Breh13

Smh.
Supporter
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
13,127
Reputation
3,501
Daps
67,403
Drop all pretenses indeed.

Comparing Coulter and Milo to Migos, isn't a point someone who's 'concerned' about selective outrage would make.

It shows he doesn't care or ignores the obvious differences.

Migos may rap about thots, drugs and guns but it's contained in that medium. However bad people may think it is.

Coulter and Milo specifically, look to inspire societal changes and use politics for that. Even got Bannon who's from Breitbart where Milo works in government, directly influencing the president and his policies which will impact millions. It's a whole different game outchea.

:mjcup:

Bad time to defend Milo anyway. :mjgrin:
 
Last edited:

Gravity

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
18,826
Reputation
2,195
Daps
56,258
@Gravity

That may be true, but he's highlighting how feminists, especially white feminists will go hard on some people for things like slut shaming, misogyny, etc., usually when its someone they already dislike. Heterosexual and Cisgender white males, conservatives whether socially, fiscally, or otherwise, Republicans, etc.. Then they'll turn around and brush off the slut shaming and misogyny of someone who is deemed a potential ally. Especially if that ally can gain them cool points as in this case, Migos.

Now personally I don't care one way or the other about any of the players involved here, but he has a point.
This isn't what he said at all. This is your spin. His comments were clear and they speak for themselves. He tried to equate migos with milo which is a false equivalence. He didn't make a valid point.
 

George's Dilemma

Banned
Supporter
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
27,794
Reputation
7,474
Daps
136,045
This isn't what he said at all. This is your spin. His comments were clear and they speak for themselves. He tried to equate migos with milo which is a false equivalence. He didn't make a valid point.


Respectfully I think you're viewing it from the wrong angle. Its not about Migos, Milo, or whomever for that matter. Its about how individuals take different approaches towards people who express similar comments, yet one is problematic while the other gets a pass. I imagine there's a few threads on LSA and Jezebel with feminist types doing mental gymnastics trying to justify to themselves and others why they enjoy certain entertainment despite how it portrays women.
 

Gravity

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
18,826
Reputation
2,195
Daps
56,258
Respectfully I think you're viewing it from the wrong angle. Its not about Migos, Milo, or whomever for that matter. Its about how individuals take different approaches towards people who express similar comments, yet one is problematic while the other gets a pass. I imagine there's a few threads on LSA and Jezebel with feminist types doing mental gymnastics trying to justify to themselves and others why they enjoy certain entertainment despite how it portrays women.
I'm not viewing it from the wrong angle. You're just wrong. The white boy's analogy is an invalid example of what you said in the bold. The migos do not equate to milo, so there's no hypocrisy in being "outraged" or intolerant of milo and not migos. You're the one looking at this from the wrong angle trying to project your own opinion on to what Shultz said. Plus you're still wrong. Of course feminists are hypocrites, that doesn't have anything to do with what Shultz said tho. Shultz point was to deflect from milo on to the people who are intolerant of him.
 

Canon

Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2013
Messages
20,438
Reputation
1,360
Daps
76,917
no difference at all between a comedian and a politician

good point andrew tell us more
 

NoGutsNoGLory

Superstar
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
6,610
Reputation
515
Daps
27,411
Not really, first the Migos are not political figures like Coulter and Milo, they are musicians. You don't hold actors, comedians, artist, entertainers to the same standards as people who make a living off of politics like Coulter and Milo.

And with rap it's selective outrage. For every "bytch Ho" lyric there is a conscience lyric that many people throw out their argument to paint a one sided picture.
Ann Coulter and Milo arent political figures their entertainers.
 

Osmosis

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
20,099
Reputation
2,551
Daps
53,832
not really.

We just had a megathread right here on the coli with a Black gospel artist (entertainer) who was scheduled to go on Ellen and was canceled after footage surfaced of her condemning gay people. Shultz has a point regarding selective outrage and it would seem that Ellen doesn't mind entertainers that shyt on Black people and promote drugs, guns and violenence but won't let gay bashers through the door.

Ellen DeGeneres: Kim Burrell Will Not Appear on Show After Anti Gay Sermon

I'm no Shultz fan but this time he's right.

:francis:
I would agree but Migos were just the center of an anti-gay controversy too. Ellen is just capitalizing on the Migos popularity, all this proves is that she selectively allows gay bashers on her show based on their level of fame.
 

Alaafin

#TeamLawrence
Supporter
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
2,653
Reputation
640
Daps
12,529
Reppin
Vine City
Ann Coulter and Milo arent political figures their entertainers.
uhh

Wikipedia said:
Milo Yiannopoulos (/jəˈnɒpᵿləs/;[1] born Milo Hanrahan; 18 October 1984)[2] is a British writer, entrepreneur, public speaker, and senior editor for Breitbart News, a far-right news and opinion website based in the United States. He wrote previously using the pseudonym Milo Andreas Wagner.[3][4]

Wikipedia said:
Ann Hart Coulter (/ˈkoʊltər/; born December 8, 1961) is an American conservative social and political commentator, writer, syndicated columnist, and lawyer. She frequently appears on television, radio, and as a speaker at public and private events.

surely you guys are trolling, right? :mjgrin:
 
Top