Tylcer, The Creator was refused entry into the UK because of his lyrics

[GlastoSimon]

whether or not Eminem's lyrics go outside the law is naff all to do with whether Tyler's do or not.

 

If Tyler has over-stepped the mark then the law has been correctly applied. End of!

 

You, like anyone else, are free to bring the authorities attention to any instances where the law should be applied.

 

I don't disagree that they're individual cases, but it just doesn't make sense to me. 

 

It's exactly the same situation. They both incite homophobia via their lyrics, yet one is fine whilst the other isn't. It's not as if this thing hasn't come up before with Eminem - protests and headlines in 2001 + other occasions, yet as far as I can see Eminem has only ever been banned by Hyde Park. They did that themselves, no govt intervention.

 

They don't really need anyone to tell them, Eminem has been far more prominent in the media etc. for this sort of thing than Tyler has

[mrtourette]

Of course it doesn't make sense, but that's not the discussion. It's basically if person A has been allowed to get away with something then does that mean person B should?

 

If Tyler should not have been banned because he wasn't serious/was just trying to create an image/has since rowed back on his views/doesn't perform those songs any more then fair enough, but saying he shouldn't have been banned because someone else wasn't is retarded. Of course it's unfair, but do you expect a government function to intelligently understand music/youth culture and sensibly apply laws across the board? No, they're going to apply a scattershot approach based on what they see as getting exposure at the moment or trying to pre-empt what the Mail are going to be up in arms about next and try and head it off before it happens.

 

That is why Eminem, Patti Smith or fucking Dragonforce are not affected, because they're either old news or nobody gives a shit about them.

 

It can't be that hard to understand can it?

[krisskross]

I have generally been agreeing with you but you're twisting the situation now. They may have similar festival positions but look at the festivals and the audience, they are no way comparable to the mainstream exposure that Tyler is getting. Even if you take their most 'mainstream' slot second on the third stage at Download is not comparable to subbing the tent at R&L.

 

The govt have not banned the sale of the music or the exposure of Tylor, just his access to the country to perform. I dont really see a difference.

 

edit; Ah yeah, I was overestimating dragonforce's popularity...fair enough

Edited September 1, 2015 by krisskross

[krisskross]

No, they're going to apply a scattershot approach based on what they see as getting exposure at the moment or trying to pre-empt what the Mail are going to be up in arms about next and try and head it off before it happens.

 

This is exactly why its discriminatory. 

[eFestivals]

I don't disagree that they're individual cases, but it just doesn't make sense to me. 

 

It's exactly the same situation. They both incite homophobia via their lyrics, yet one is fine whilst the other isn't.

That's all your assumption.

For a start we don't know what lyrics exactly Tyler might have been banned for.

And if it was for homophobic lyrics and Shady classes as not-too-homophobic-to-be-banned while Tyler is homophobic enough to be banned, then that would presumably be down to differences in what the actual lyrics say. Different words do not hold the same meaning.

 

If, of course, anyone has ever actually brought Eminem to the authorities attention. Just because someone is famous doesn't mean that the relevant visa official is listening to his music.

 

And if it is how you say and Shady is being given a free pass somehow, it still doesn't get Tyler in. The action should be towards Eminem and not removing restrictions on Tyler.

 

[eFestivals]

This is exactly why its discriminatory. 

 

Except it's defo not happening in the way you're calling out as discriminatory, because waaay more than the very famous are being refused visas, as a link I provided last week got to show.

[Chris_Hayter88]

But is all seriousness this should have never have happened at all, heck there is a lot more offensive artists out there than Tyler.

Yeah it should. Eminem for example.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Chris_Hayter88

[eFestivals]

The govt have not banned the sale of the music or the exposure of Tylor, just his access to the country to perform. I dont really see a difference.

 

I'd guess it's the difference between free speech and providing platforms for those speeches to be made.

 

In a similar vein, I wouldn't want to have the BNP banned, but neither would I want them treated the same as 'normal' political parties by the likes of the BBC. They are allowed a voice, but are not provided with the platform to speak from (they can get their own if they like).

[krisskross]

Oh

 

For a start we don't know what lyrics exactly Tyler might have been banned for.

 

However, government papers given to Tyler specifically cite lyrics from VCR, Blow, Sarah, Tron Cat and French, and explain that he was rejected under the terms of Home Office policy on “behaviours unacceptable in the UK”

 

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2015/sep/01/tyler-the-creator-comments-banned-uk-freedom-of-speech

[eFestivals]

Oh

 

 

However, government papers given to Tyler specifically cite lyrics from VCR, Blow, Sarah, Tron Cat and French, and explain that he was rejected under the terms of Home Office policy on “behaviours unacceptable in the UK”

 

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2015/sep/01/tyler-the-creator-comments-banned-uk-freedom-of-speech

 

 

and those songs are what? Homophobic?

[eFestivals]

I just read the piece.

 

It appears - from his own version of things - that he might have been treated unfairly.

 

I do however support the principle of of banning outspoken homophobes from the UK, to deny the platform we'd be giving them.

[krisskross]

and those songs are what? Homophobic?

 

Just read a couple and its mostly rape..

[dentalplan]

 

His merch seems pretty inclusive for an "outspoken homophobe".

[the wonderwhy]

Isn't that a Nazi symbol? 

 

I dunno where I stand on this, its a complete mess. 

[eFestivals]

Just read a couple and its mostly rape..

 

and are you still defending it?

[krisskross]

and are you still defending it?

 

I was never defending it. 

[eFestivals]

I was never defending it. 

 

lol

[krisskross]

lol

 

I only said that singling him out was discriminatory. I've never defended him.

[Yellow_Fellow]

Isn't that a Nazi symbol?

I dunno where I stand on this, its a complete mess.

white pride. it's ironic.

[the wonderwhy]

Yeah I sorta got my head around that, but I don't think most normal people will understand the irony... 

[krisskross]

Yeah I sorta got my head around that, but I don't think most normal people will understand the irony... 

 

I think that sums up most of his argument about the lyrics.

[eFestivals]

I only said that singling him out was discriminatory. I've never defended him.

 

 

OK, OK, you were only saying any crimes should be ignored. My apologies.

[Yellow_Fellow]

Yeah I sorta got my head around that, but I don't think most normal people will understand the irony...

I don't think we need to base art to the lowest common denominator

[the wonderwhy]

I don't think we need to base art to the lowest common denominator

 

No, but that t-shirt isn't really art

[dentalplan]

No, but that t-shirt isn't really art

 

The picture of a black man and a white man holding hands with the rainbow flag colours blasted over a neo-nazi symbol is. The t-shirt itself kinda isn't considering most of Tyler's fans are white middle class youths and, if just wearing it casually, the irony will be lost to a certain extent but it's probably in pretty limited supply anyway.

Edited September 1, 2015 by dentalplan