The Rolling Stones remove 'Brown Sugar' from tour setlist over lyrics depicting slavery

 The Rolling Stones may have dubbed their tour "No Filter," but the iconic rock band has filtered out one of their most popular songs from their setlist. 

The band retired their 1971 hit song "Brown Sugar" from their current tour, for now, over "conflicts" surrounding the controversial lyrics that depict slavery, rape and drugs, guitarist Keith Richards confirmed to The Los Angeles Times. 

"You picked up on that, huh?" Richards told the outlet after he was asked why the band has refrained from playing it. He added that he doesn't understand the controversy. 

"I’m trying to figure out with the sisters quite where the beef is," Richards said. "Didn’t they understand this was a song about the horrors of slavery? But they’re trying to bury it. At the moment I don’t want to get into conflicts with all of this."

USA TODAY reached out to The Rolling Stones for comment. 

According to Genius' song interpretation, "'Brown Sugar' runs through different white and Black sexual interactions," including nonconsensual sex between a slave and slave owner, who had "total ownership of Black women but also had total physical and sexual access."

The first verse of the song depicts slaves being sold in the slave trade in New Orleans and being beaten at will: "Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields/ Sold in the market down in New Orleans/ Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright/ Hear him whip the women just around midnight."

"Brown Sugar" ends: "How come you, how come you taste so good? Just like a, just like a Black girl should."

In 2019, music producer Ian Brennan accused the band of "glorifying slavery, rape, torture and pedophilia," adding that they have "brazenly gotten away with this jeering harassment for decades." He called for the songs to be removed from the radio.

"The issue today is not that they ever wrote the song. Nor that they have ever sung it. The fault is that they keep singing it," Brennan wrote in The Chicago Tribune. 

However, Richards and Mick Jagger both stated that "Brown Sugar" may not be gone for good.  

"I’m hoping that we’ll be able to resurrect the babe in her glory somewhere along the track," Richards told the LA Times. Jagger added, "We might put it back in."

"We’ve played ‘Brown Sugar’ every night since 1970, so sometimes you think, 'We’ll take that one out for now and see how it goes,'" Jagger said. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/music/2021/10/13/rolling-stones-retire-brown-sugar-over-lyrics-depicting-slavery/8441006002/




Another example of Cancel Culture or another example of a song that should never have been written?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more