No hate, but I don't recognize much of what you're arguing against in the article itself, though I would agree with you if I did. I appreciate the line by line- I'm going to respond in the same format.
Which is what? Hip hop is gay? Or that hip hop hates gays because it's gay? GTFOH with that.
Neither one, and if you're endorsing one of those two, I can see why the article wouldn't sit well with you. The thesis is that there is a strain (which we can agree isn't necessarily the dominant one anymore, but definitely was during gangsta rap's prime) of rap culture that promotes hypermasculinity, which includes misogyny and the fetishization of a certain kind of maleness, and that both of these are intricately connected to homoeroticism, which exists in a strange, repressed form in that same strain. The connection itself manifests in a few different ways, but all of them are ultimately negative.
1. A Vibe editor saying LL on a cover means it's appealing to men sexually is an opinion. And no more valid than saying collecting baseball cards is appealing to sports fans because they got it bad for their favorite pitcher.
You're simplifying the argument here. The fact is that Vibe magazine, and 50 Cent albums have a primarily male audience. So when you see a picture of 50, shirtless, greased up, flexing and posing on the cover of The Massacre, it isn't for a female viewership. So you have to ask yourself why, then, would that be appealing to a male viewer? What is it about that? That is very, very different from saying that a picture of a baseball player on a card is gay. A shirtless, oiled up man posing and flexing is not the same as a baseball player in a regular portrait. If you had a friend who only collected shirtless pics of male players, would you find that unremarkable?
2. Snoop Dog didn't advocate group sex, he advocated sharing.
Again, the argument is NOT that he advocated group sex. It's that there are homoerotic subtexts to certain kinds of sexual activity. In that lyric, Snoop specifically says, and this is not twisting his words, that it's "no fun" unless "we all (as in the men) get some." This is similar to frat boys who fantasize about high-fiving each other while fukking the same woman. In this case, the pleasure of each man is explicitly enhanced and mediated by the pleasure of the other men, which is exactly what Snoop is suggesting. That is textbook homoeroticism. Now, keep in mind that the general tenor of the song is misogynistic. Both Snoop and Kurupt say specifically that they don't respect these women and that they "aren't shyt." So the women aren't actually sources of enjoyment here- they are just tools that mediate between the real source of enjoyment, which is other men. In that specific context, yes, sharing is homoerotic.
3. He misconstrued wanting a strong woman with wanting a strong man.
No, he didn't conflate the two. He said that the two are similar enough, not by coincidence, but because they both issue from the same cultural norms, to open the door for confused behavior in the males who subscribe to those hypermasculine ideals.
4. He doesn't understand (for lack of a better word) ghetto culture and what actually drives it.
No one is coming up with a general explanation of "ghetto culture." This is specifically about hypermasculinity and those who subscribe to it.
5. He doesn't understand the actual reasoning, motives and interaction sex plays in prison nor how sex in general, particularly rape is about power, not sex.
Of course rape is about power. But it's not
just about power, because there's no such thing is power abstracted from particular social contexts. Power isn't an independent entity that can be measured or discussed as if it exists as an object. A man who rapes another man is after power, yes- but he's also ok with fukking a man, and chose that among all the other ways to exercise power. He doesn't have to see that as gay. But if a man gets your dikk hard, straight is not the word for you, either.
6. He claims homo eroticism is a response to mysogeny because it's frowned on for being "soft" with a girl.
He never says that homoeroticism is directly caused by misogyny. Rather, he says that the latter opens the door for "lines to blur." It's not a necessary connection, but is something that can and did happen. And misogyny, the way he talks about it, isn't the sole factor. There is also the element of upholding male relationships as the highest ones, which in itself isn't gay, but again, contributes to opening the door for it. Historically, both of those elements are correlated with homoeroticism. Look at the ancient Greeks. Plato specifically says women are inferior to men and that the highest form of relationship is "non-sexual" love between two men, exactly what several gangsta rappers have said. "Homies over hoes," as McGruder put it. Is it then any surprise that men were fukking all the time in Plato's culture, and that he himself extols fukking young boys and men?
7. He has a jacked understanding of gender roles, their origins and their impact on society and culture and vise versa.
This is a general statement that I'm assuming refers to all the other arguments you made.
8. Dude flat out said being tight with your boys means lines get blurred, dude is basically saying brotherly love is sexual
Again, he did not say that being tight with your boys necessarily leads to blurred lines. He said that the combination of hypermasculinity's misogyny and upholding of maleness as requisite for an ideal relationship opens the door for lines to blur. In some cases, this is followed by either subliminal or explicit homoeroticism, and in gangsta rap, that was the case. Young Thug would not be wearing dresses right now if thug culture didn't already have a homo element. Nothing homo he does has any connection to white gay culture invading, as some people desperately want to believe. It's all homegrown.
