Trying to make the Scene
Why in the hell is this linked on CNN's homepage????
But more importantly, I'm distressed to hear CNN call Sheryl Crow "brave," which is based on the following criteria: breast cancer, a public break up with Lance Armstrong, and bolder lyrics. Battling breast cancer is, obviously, scary and difficult. However, is it really necessary to turn her story into a fable for everyone to respect and follow? I find it hard to believe that there aren't more powerful stories about cancer survivors. In fact, I'd really rather here their stories (some place other than Extreme Home Makeover, plz). You know - a story where the person afflicted with cancer can't spend millions of dollars getting a variety of treatments and opinions, where the person can't afford to quit working for months at a time to get well, etc. Focusing on Sheryl's cakewalk with cancer is about the equivalent of putting me on those "when animals attack" shows whenever my cats scratch.
But I'd take her cancer stories if it meant NO ONE gave her any more sympathy for a bad break up. Everyone goes through bad relationships. Surviving that doesn't necessarily make you brave. Good God, if it did, Lindsay Lohan would be the bravest person on the planet. ;) But the way I see it - break ups suck. Of course, they do. However, the only option is to continue on with your life (you know, after you kick them real hard in the balls). And especially when the writer's respect originates in the fact that Sheryl and Lance had a public break up, I can't possibly agree.
No one said that Sheryl and Lance MUST be a public couple. No one said that they had to appear on Oprah together or that she had to write a crappy album filled with hackneyed love songs. Yes, anyone in Hollywood will suffer from a certain amount of intrusion on his/her life. But courting that kind of attention is not mandatory. It's a CHOICE to live your life publicly as these two did.
Perhaps most irritating (and offensive) is the notion that Sheryl is brave because of her "bold lyrics." Specifically, she takes on the taboo topics of the Bush administration, the Iraq War, and Hurricane Katrina (you can't hear my sarcasm, but I assure you it's there). I'm sorry, but FUCK YOU. It's really fucking easy to be brave now when the President has an approval rating hovering around 30%. What risk is there to talk about the Iraq War and Hurricane Katrina NOW when other artists and Americans have already done that??????
Where was Sheryl Crow when Kanye West said that George Bush hates black people? Or when the Dixie Chicks said they were ashamed to be from Texas, thus igniting a HUGE backlash? Where was she when the war protesters tried to stop the Iraq War from happening? Where the fuck was Sheryl when the 2000 election happened?
Bravery doesn't exist if you're doing what's popular and when thousands upon thousands of people have stuck their necks out BEFORE YOU.
The article says, "Crow hopes the new album is a wake-up call for a nation that's been in a deep slumber during the Bush years."
Okay, seriously. Is there anything more offensive than the idea that if you support George W. Bush, you're IGNORANT??? Well, I suppose if she was saying I was ignorant, that would be more offensive to me, lol. But for real, as some people may have noticed.... I like debating; I love political discussions. However, I would NEVER say that anyone who disagreed with me needed to "wake up." Uh, you know, unless they'd actually fallen asleep from me boring them. ;)
I know that I put forward my views very strongly, which I'll never apologize for. But I think there's a difference between being passionate about your beliefs and feeling the need to call everyone else stupid. Also, my little mind is capable of comprehending the idea that some people can like George W. Bush still and be informed. So too do I realize that if a person can get this far into an administration and NOT dislike the President, then they probably aren't ever going to start. Unless he starts throwing babies around in the Oval Office, it's just really not going to happen.
And more than that, I can't find myself being roused by someone who's a good 10 years late to the party. Not to mention, if I needed political motivation, would I really find that in a Sheryl Crow album????
But more importantly, I'm distressed to hear CNN call Sheryl Crow "brave," which is based on the following criteria: breast cancer, a public break up with Lance Armstrong, and bolder lyrics. Battling breast cancer is, obviously, scary and difficult. However, is it really necessary to turn her story into a fable for everyone to respect and follow? I find it hard to believe that there aren't more powerful stories about cancer survivors. In fact, I'd really rather here their stories (some place other than Extreme Home Makeover, plz). You know - a story where the person afflicted with cancer can't spend millions of dollars getting a variety of treatments and opinions, where the person can't afford to quit working for months at a time to get well, etc. Focusing on Sheryl's cakewalk with cancer is about the equivalent of putting me on those "when animals attack" shows whenever my cats scratch.
But I'd take her cancer stories if it meant NO ONE gave her any more sympathy for a bad break up. Everyone goes through bad relationships. Surviving that doesn't necessarily make you brave. Good God, if it did, Lindsay Lohan would be the bravest person on the planet. ;) But the way I see it - break ups suck. Of course, they do. However, the only option is to continue on with your life (you know, after you kick them real hard in the balls). And especially when the writer's respect originates in the fact that Sheryl and Lance had a public break up, I can't possibly agree.
No one said that Sheryl and Lance MUST be a public couple. No one said that they had to appear on Oprah together or that she had to write a crappy album filled with hackneyed love songs. Yes, anyone in Hollywood will suffer from a certain amount of intrusion on his/her life. But courting that kind of attention is not mandatory. It's a CHOICE to live your life publicly as these two did.
Perhaps most irritating (and offensive) is the notion that Sheryl is brave because of her "bold lyrics." Specifically, she takes on the taboo topics of the Bush administration, the Iraq War, and Hurricane Katrina (you can't hear my sarcasm, but I assure you it's there). I'm sorry, but FUCK YOU. It's really fucking easy to be brave now when the President has an approval rating hovering around 30%. What risk is there to talk about the Iraq War and Hurricane Katrina NOW when other artists and Americans have already done that??????
Where was Sheryl Crow when Kanye West said that George Bush hates black people? Or when the Dixie Chicks said they were ashamed to be from Texas, thus igniting a HUGE backlash? Where was she when the war protesters tried to stop the Iraq War from happening? Where the fuck was Sheryl when the 2000 election happened?
Bravery doesn't exist if you're doing what's popular and when thousands upon thousands of people have stuck their necks out BEFORE YOU.
The article says, "Crow hopes the new album is a wake-up call for a nation that's been in a deep slumber during the Bush years."
Okay, seriously. Is there anything more offensive than the idea that if you support George W. Bush, you're IGNORANT??? Well, I suppose if she was saying I was ignorant, that would be more offensive to me, lol. But for real, as some people may have noticed.... I like debating; I love political discussions. However, I would NEVER say that anyone who disagreed with me needed to "wake up." Uh, you know, unless they'd actually fallen asleep from me boring them. ;)
I know that I put forward my views very strongly, which I'll never apologize for. But I think there's a difference between being passionate about your beliefs and feeling the need to call everyone else stupid. Also, my little mind is capable of comprehending the idea that some people can like George W. Bush still and be informed. So too do I realize that if a person can get this far into an administration and NOT dislike the President, then they probably aren't ever going to start. Unless he starts throwing babies around in the Oval Office, it's just really not going to happen.
And more than that, I can't find myself being roused by someone who's a good 10 years late to the party. Not to mention, if I needed political motivation, would I really find that in a Sheryl Crow album????