Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 643 posts

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#191

Post by bluGill »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #65
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An important topic here is that shame is also a construct, and it is a collective construct. Certain things are shameful in one culture, not in another. This isn’t to say that we don’t have a gut feeling when something feels wrong. We have an inner sense of boundaries which eg. can be damaged by trauma and deeply affects our ability to connect and such. But when it comes to adult relationships there is a wide spectru…

I don't quite buy that; whatever your cultural norms are, there will always be a significant problem with any kind of forced violation of this kind.

Perhaps, but none of this was forced. It was clear that if you didn't play the game you wouldn't get farther in general, but you had a choice, if you call get out of music a choice.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#192

Post by bjourne »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #12

It's hard to imagine this is only the music industry. Human use sex as a weapon and a tool all the time. True, it might be more useful in the music industry but why would sex as currency only exist there? Where there are humans, there is sex. The obviousness of how that plays out may differ but the underlying theme is universal.

Perhaps because the music industry is so dependent on personal connections and because talent is very subjective? In academia, doctorate students usually do not have to sleep with their supervisors to get their degree.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#193

Post by [deleted] »

bluGill wrote: post #191
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't quite buy that; whatever your cultural norms are, there will always be a significant problem with any kind of forced violation of this kind.

Perhaps, but none of this was forced. It was clear that if you didn't play the game you wouldn't get farther in general, but you had a choice, if you call get out of music a choice.

[deleted]

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#194

Post by mathgorges »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #61

The internet is enabling a new norm in reducing the cost of calling out behavior. Some of this is good, e.g. calling out sexual abuse. Some of this is bad, e.g. cancel culture that has no means of forgiveness.

I've seen this take quite a bit lately with respect to cancel culture and I'm a bit confused about it.

Since HN is amazing, I'm hoping someone here can help me understand without it turning into a flamewar.

I don't understand how "cancel culture" is substantially different from what we used to call "boycotts", just with the internet for more social lubrication.

I suppose theres a risk that the allegations at the center of the boycott are incorrect, but isn't that what defamation laws are meant to combat?

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#195

Post by vinger »

bluGill wrote: post #188

My understanding is this was more common in years past. Up to the 1950s it was understood a good looking secretary got her job in bed. The really ugly ones got and kept it by being good at the job, with a possible side of the wife doing well in bed. Even then it was understood as not always true, but it was true enough. Secretaries at the time demanded the ability handle boredom as a lot of the job was doing the simp…

It was never true the pretty ones put out and the uglies were good at there jobs. The less good looking probably put out more where the more beautiful could get by on a bosses hope.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#196

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

agumonkey wrote: post #148
shakow wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The big question is will internet free the good artists that were gatekeeped I don't think so. What they need the most is publicity, and this is not magically granted by internet. Just take a look at e.g. Spotify; I'm sure there are hundreds of extremely gifted artists sitting down at barely a few dozens listenings, just because no one found them.

But it's interesting. Do we like artists due to marketing only ? Or seducing feature over artistic quality. A small but gifted artist on Spotify could, in theory (in theory), generate word of mouth at quickly get known. Sometimes I believe that labels were filters for that. They could see who was just very good and who had some 'it factor'.

'Some factor' was usually the previous generations' equivalent of virality - typically a blend of sexual charisma, personal charisma, theatricality, entertainment value, and shock value.

Without that packaging music is a very tough sell. Being competent and creative on its own isn't enough.

I can't think of anyone who has made it on musicality alone without at least some of the above OR enthusiastic and regular promotion by gatekeepers (top radio DJs) while they were still an influence.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#197

Post by ThankYouBernard »

vinger wrote: post #195
bluGill wrote: post #188

My understanding is this was more common in years past. Up to the 1950s it was understood a good looking secretary got her job in bed. The really ugly ones got and kept it by being good at the job, with a possible side of the wife doing well in bed. Even then it was understood as not always true, but it was true enough. Secretaries at the time demanded the ability handle boredom as a lot of the job was doing the simp…

It was never true the pretty ones put out and the uglies were good at there jobs. The less good looking probably put out more where the more beautiful could get by on a bosses hope.

who needs Mad Men when you can just read HN in 2021

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#198

Post by csharptwdec19 »

I'll be bold and say it's the media industry has a problem.

I remember family members having problems/reservations with Weinstein's behavior back in the 90's. People like Corey Feltman have been speaking up for years.

But nobody cares because we're getting good cinema and TV, right?

A huge part of these industries are based on 'favors' and 'networking'. Toss in the theory that you have a higher-than-baseline level of narcissism in this talent pool and you lead to a recipe for abuse.

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#199

Post by kwertyoowiyop »

nabla9 wrote: post #13

It makes perfect sense. Music industry is a economics of superstars. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1803469 Very few stars get huge profits and after that it's long slim tail. Talent or high work ethic is not enough for success, "getting discovered" aka someone likes you and invests the initial money and effort is another factor. If personal effort is not enough and the artist has nothing else, selling your ass for an…

Sure, but what’s the catch?

Re: 'Sexual favours were the norm in music industry'

#200

Post by matkoniecz »

mathgorges wrote: post #194
mensetmanusman wrote: post #61

The internet is enabling a new norm in reducing the cost of calling out behavior. Some of this is good, e.g. calling out sexual abuse. Some of this is bad, e.g. cancel culture that has no means of forgiveness.

I've seen this take quite a bit lately with respect to cancel culture and I'm a bit confused about it. Since HN is amazing, I'm hoping someone here can help me understand without it turning into a flamewar. I don't understand how "cancel culture" is substantially different from what we used to call "boycotts", just with the internet for more social lubrication. I suppose theres a risk that the allegations at the cent…

Not an expert, but big difference is that boycotts are against companies/businesses while cancellations target individuals.
Post reply on HN