Rob_86

Perhaps yeah, but also when you make things clearer often people realise they aren't really disagreeing all that greatly if at all. Like you might assume someone is saying thigns he isn't, and then it takes posts like Tam up there to point out what is really being said etc. In all reality I don't think anyone here has differing base moralities or anything (ie I dont think anyone is actually in support of Nazi bands) we simply disagree on finer points, and those have become a lot clearer this morning, and seem not so great as far as I can see.

Not specifically, but if you're debating the issue then the goal is agreement yes.

I would agree with that, I don't think they are likely to have a huge individual effect - largely due to their seemingly endless unpopularity (!). However its not always the biggest or most popular bits of culture that spark things, and the tiny progression they might have made (no matter how small or untintentional) is still a pretty negative thing that is easily, and best avoided. Are we all reaching any nearer agreement? The different views look worryingly similar compared to at some points in this thread!

Half your morning - is that all? Try typing half the posts when you're meant to be working lol good job it's a slow day

I like your thinking. But no, seriously, I think it is often difficult to judge if a band is doing enough, if irony is thier intention-thats a valid point. However in this example, even at gigs from friends who went saying they didn't spot any irony at all, there didn't seem to be any. I mean credit to the band for saying afterwards that it was meant to be ironic, but there is hardly a 'date rape' esque edge to the music, or any discernible irony to their music. A lot of people on here might hear actual Nazi bands and discern irony from it when there is none - my point is that it has to be clear for everyone, and if it isn't then there is no harm just thinking about it and stopping/changing the music - it is just that, music after all. And in the grand scheme of things, there are more important things. I don't think banning things is right, but I would promote the idea of musicians taking responisbility for their musical content certainly.

I don't think so -triggers are exactly as you suggest, except that they don't neccesarily always appear. Most of us could be induced to murder for example, if given the right set of triggers, but we don't. Your question about were to draw the line is an interesting one, and perhaps far more steeped in opinion than our previous discussion. I would say that something like a computer game ie GTA, if played by someone of a reasonable adult age wouldn't be particularly badly affected, and the game wouldn't have a particular effect on culture (though I'm no expert on that - it doesn't appear to though, perhaps for reasons myself/other folk have put across on here already). However I think Nazi bands are an example that do have effects on people, especially their fans/culture they are in, and so bands taking the piss like wifebeater have to be very careful. I mean really, why bother making an 'ironic' band anyway, why not act responsibly and steer well clear in the first place. But if you wanna make the band, just think about it at least - rather than hiding the irony away so as to piss people off.

Yes I did. Nice clip Perhaps didn't mention the exact word, but it is implied lol! I'd like to think the shades of grey appear in every argument, and show development of the issue/ extensions being bought in. The actual argument I'm making as a whole is pretty black and white as far as I am concerned though. (caution: shit analogy) There may be grey tentacles, but the body is black and white:ding: I didn't demand a serious tone, I just think one should probably be afforded such an issue. After all, if my argument was correct then it is a very serious issue - regardless of any effect wifebeater actually had. And if not, well should people really be arrogant enough to assume their correctness before hearing an entire argument. I have tried not to do that, and taken the serious comments on board and treated them with respect even though I didn't agree with them - and it would be an easier and clearer discussion if everyone did do that, but I'm not forcing anyone. A few people have made that last bit clear...

You're making the assumption that if something doesn't outright incite a whole number of bad events, then it isn't itself bad. Humans work much more subtley than that, and as I'm sure you're well aware, cultural changes don't just appear, they gradually increase until they have become accepted. Nothing really ever does such, outwith things like cults(ie religous sects, not the place, though I've never been...), but plenty of things do affect people into cultural changes. To get back to a sexist ruled society (if it has ever properly went away) all you need is for the jokes to get more accepted, and for the wrong groups (ie maleable minds) to see the acceptance of such social jokes without understanding the idea/importance of equality (which undoubtedly is lacking in our society's education system). It's all very well for a band not to want responsibility for this, and berift their music of such issues (though are certain marxist arguments that seem useful in that discussion, but that's something else altogether), but to turn the music into a promotion of the inequality isn't right, and if you're going to do it ironically then it has to have a strong essence of that else it will fail to capture the masses with irony (much like this band) and only seek to do what the irony-less version of the music will do. Am I making my points any clearer? That is the jist of a pretty straight forward argument, as clear as I could make it, so feel free to take that as my view and counter accordingly - might make the thread a bit easier than tracking back to points everywhere.

I agree it probably is more influential in childhood, though there are people who would argue certain things are more influential in teen years - as moral views develop mostly then. Which isn't a particularly contentious point, however I would agree that cultural triggers after childhood are needed in the majority of cases - not with the extreme mentally ill on the whole, but with most cases. And hence why things like this are an issue - cultural triggers are such by their very existence, and without outward irony they will almost always act as triggers to some people (not a great number perhaps, but more than just the 1 incidental case) Obviously Wifebeater didn't have the number of fans to cause this kinda thing, but the very fact that they have a bunch of people arguing pro the rights of freedom to make such 'ironic' jokes, regardless of their influence on people, is just one sign that backs me up. Though I'm sure after a sentence like that a defensive backlash will be forthcoming...

I heard from one of my mates who works with a lot of local charities that it wasn't, the information put across on this thread simply backs it up. How exactly do you know it was donated? And not just used as a covering ass point like the 'clear irony', which only became clear after they split up.

Urm I did, there isn't one paradoxical thing in what you pointed out!! The tone wasn't established as, several people had tried to bring up decent points, one in particular being shot down with sexist replies. I don't know the situation so I won't comment, but the tone certainly wasn't set as 'no serious debate allowed' and even if it was, why couldn't it turn that way if someone bought up a serious point? Strange view.

Wasn't that a lie? I was under the impression that that particular womens charity said they didn't received the fund, and would have rejected them if they were offered.

Mental health issues aren't neccesary for most murder/abuse, that's an outdated myth. you just need a disposition to not respect other humans and it is taken from there. And that disrespect is pretty much solid for most folk during youth due to poor/hypocritical decisions in education/governmental systems. It is clear that influences in culture do have an affect on a persons psyche, I would hope we don't disagree on that, and unless this undying respect for sentience/conmsciousness is taught in youth (which it isn't in any culture as far as I am aware) then the first layer is already built. And as for your second paragraph, I would agree to some extent if it were obvious that they were taking the piss - but it wasn't, even as per their own admission that it was meant to piss people off, which it wouldn't have done if it was obvious they were bing ironic or whatever. That really should be the end of that particular point, the irony was not obvious - except apparently at gigs, for which about one person here knows!

With all due respect I don't think you grasp the idea of influence, and aren't willing to discuss it so we will have to agree to disagree. It certainly isn't true that people indulge in domestic abuse just because of childhood trauma, or genetic disposition. Cultural signs have a massive effect - and this kinda thing is one of them.

I made the point comedians get away with being ironic easier, as it is their job, not that it is one rule for one and one for another medium. I am quite happy to admit there may well be comedians who push this too far, I just don't know of any/think there are any in the public sphere. As for banning songs, I haven't approached that issue. My point (among others) has been that wifebeater could have had a negative impact, which I am only one of hundreds to have seen by the sounds of it's public discussion, and that it doesn't clear them of responsibility just because they were being ironic (or say they were or whatever) after splitting up - or 'hiding it' in while together. As for the similarities with Ross/Brand, it's very different. What they did was offensive to the guy were calling, and perhaps did influence a lot of folks to say 'hey theres nothing wrong with treating other people with this lack of respect' but I don't know enough about that situation to pass comment. This one is different, though it has many similarities obviously. And don't get me wrong, I am not in the slightest bit offended by the insults - just think it is a bit of a piss poor reply to make when your discussing issues of ethical concern, for which there are people who do suffer in. As even if you do think I'm wrong, it's still an important issue.

Any point that people has made that ahs been a valid one has been debated. When people have just gone - i disagree followed by some odd observation that makes little sense as to how the world is, of course I defer backt o original points that are more fair reflections, that is a pretty fair way to debate. With all due respect, I am not doubting your intelligence, I'm sure you are a clever guy. But in this debate you haven't been particularly open with your responses, or as to why my points are wrong. I don't personally think that when debating a point it is enough to just spout an opinion, I think you have to use reasons why. And on these I have always responded, and will continue to.

Good God, grow up. I'm afraid domestic abuse is a problem even if it doesn't affect you, so this issue is worth debating. Sorry if it's getting in the way of you discussing a new abulm, why not start a new thread?

I just think it's an important thing to get straight, and a useful thing to everyone to think about. Everyone is speaking about it as PC gone mad, when in actual fact it doesn't really fit into that category at all. It is however good to get it straight that freedom of speech should have it's limits, as often musicians fail to see this. There are worse things in the world than stopping yourself from making a band to piss people off, if say it could have negative impacts on things like domestic abuse. That's all I'm saying...though I have had to say it a few times, and in a few different ways I admit...taking on board a lot of useful criticism along the way...

I would take your comments on board if you hadn't ignored my points all the way through, and weren't just trying to wind me up now. Perhaps you should try and make me sound like a dick again, will that make you feel better? Don't for a second try debating the actual issue, wouldn't wanna actually get anywhere.

Sorry yeah, I should just be quiet and not put my views across, or argue actual reason - it's not like most people are arguing freedom of speech or anything is it. Why not jump off the bandwagon for a second? It's a bit of shame people can't discuss things, and when having their views challenged respond with anger that someone isn't thinking in line with everyone else. This is a thread for discussion of this, and I am discussing it - deal with it, or perhaps don't read it as it will only make you challenge your ignorant views - and God forbid you might be wrong about something. What I have said is pretty simple - if a band is acting like a Nazi band, all be it intentionally ironic, and yet there is no outward sign of this irony to the masses, then there is no difference. Simple as that, whether you like it or not, that is how most of us saw the band. - it then becomes the problem of such nazi bands (which I am not for a second saying the guys in this band were - I don't know them), which surely you can't all argue for freedom of speech over incitings to violence and the such? Is that really what our underground music scene has become? A cause for absolute and undying freedom over all else?

Well I didn't deliberately avoid it, I assumed the irony, and couldn't find any so stopped assuming. That's fair enough, and seems much more intelligent than most of the arguments I have heard on here. I would say, sarcasm aside, that stupidity would rest with those who try to justify things like this with appeal to low forms of wit like irony. I mean it's a matter of taste (not much taste in my opinion, but that's just an opinion) as to whether irony like that is funny, but as to denying it's impact because you like it/like being ironic/like defending these mythical virtues like freedom of speech that most music ceases to exercise usefully anyway these days, then that is both ignorant, unaware and stupid. In my OPINION. People like to give their opinion on here rather than using logical arguments, so I thought I'd give mine

Lol, yep I'm sure people will read your post and assume you are correct - unfortunately just disagreeing doesn't counter arguments, and I have refuted every single response quiote reasonably. Perhaps you could study a course in logic or something? You seem to think that replying once, with comments that are then easily refuted, is a winning method - let me assure you it is not. I hope the insults are fun for you though - it's nice to know that kind of thing is the way to discuss issues on this board. And fatally flawed, that would imply my argument didn't logically follow on, or was false at some point - at which no one has pointed out the part it was. There has been discussion, but I'm pretty sure I have answered the replies. The go to card of 'it's Political Correctness gone mad!' didn't work as there are reasonable links to negative impact, and the 'everybody who doesn't get purposefully hidden irony is a twat so it doesn't matter', now that is a flawed argument. Perhaps you could say why it is fatally flawed, because I think the other guys who did must have deleted their posts - either that or your throwing your insults around for no reason - and that's not like you. Unless you're going to sit on the ace in the musicians pack - 'musicians shouldn't be responsible for their impact on people'. Oh yeah I totally agree, after all musicians are Gods who shouldn't have to answer to anyone...or is there a new argument, perhaps based around 'you're a knob, and you don't realise it's cool to offend people - hence this music is justified'?

On the contrary, I have discussed the points you make and think I have ignored, on censorship and how this band strikes me as a bit different to other examples that people bought up earlier in the thread. There's PC, which is often a tool used in oversensitivity, and there are bands that cross the line from irony into the same group as those bands that do promote things like sexist attacks etc, and other than those of us who didn't realise they were 'being ironic' (despite there being no evidence of this) being completely stupid apparently, and so the ironic intentions justify it, then there is no other defense of that is there?

No I heard about them on here, posters around the place, and through my mates - and as already mentioned, not just by me, there is no sign that they are being ironic - and as they stated there aim was to piss people off, so presumably that is why they didn't let on. This thread started after they ended(or around that time?), not a lot of use at the time

my bad, was started on the 2nd March