Michelle Duggar's transphobia and stranger danger

The latest trending scandal in American popular culture involves the Duggars, the large family behind the reality TV show 19 Kids and Counting. This is because the Duggars' eldest son Josh, now 27, was revealed to have molested some of his younger sisters when he was 14. He confessed to his actions to his parents multiple times in 2002, who waited until late 2003 to report Josh's behavior to the police. Before that, the Duggar parents sent Josh to the Basic Life Principles Training Center, a Christian-based clinic, for treatment.

I'm writing not to rehash all the nasty details about the Basic Life Principles Training Center or the police officer who gave Josh a "stern talk" that have been already discussed in depth elsewhere. Rather, the political activism of the Duggar family show an interesting intersection between anti-LGBT discrimination and social science.

What's been revealed about Josh shines a rather hypocritical light on the Duggar family's political advocacy with regards to sex and the law.

As a Republican US Senate candidate in 2002 (who lost in the primary) for the seat that would be won by Democrat Mark Pryor, Jim Bob Duggar (then a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives) ran on a platform that included advocating the death penalty for rape or incest. And you could not make this up: As state representative in Arkansas, Jim Bob Duggar was vice chair of the Corrections and Criminal Law Subcommittee. So Jim Bob is not only a coward but a hypocrite: a man whose "tough on crime" standards expire within his own family. He can't ruin his political or media opportunities, after all!

Jim Bob's wife Michelle also partook in some political activism of her own last year. A resident of neighboring Tontitown, she recorded a robocall for voters in Fayetteville (home of the University of Arkansas), opposing a ballot initiative that would ban anti-LGBT discrimination in the city's public accommodations. Michelle Duggar stated in her robocall:

I don’t believe the citizens of Fayetteville would want males with past child predator convictions that claim they are female to have a legal right to enter private areas that are reserved for women and girls. I doubt that Fayetteville parents would stand for a law that would endanger their daughters or allow them to be traumatized by a man joining them in their private space.

Slightly off-topic: Do political robocalls reach cell phone users, not just landlines? In my nearly 9 years having the same cell number, I have never had a political campaign call my cell number, not even leave a voicemail. But I recall plenty of times when my landline (which was disconnected around 2010, 2011 maybe) got political campaign voicemails. The Fayetteville anti-discrimination ordinance was repealed in the ballot box. No doubt in my mind that Michelle Duggar's hateful, frightening robocall reached plenty of older, more conservative voters who voted to repeal, since younger, more socially progressive voters are less likely to even have a landline phone at all (gotta be as likely the case in Fayetteville, Ark. as it is in the San Francisco Bay Area).

Fast forward to today. Michelle Duggar, about a decade after knowing that her daughters were abused by their own older brother, had (and still has) the gall to accuse transgender people of being child molesters? That's so appalling that even Megyn Kelly of Fox News (not exactly an LGBT-friendly TV network) had to ask Michelle Duggar in her "exclusive" with Jim Bob and Michelle: “How could you unfairly… compare transgender people to child molesters, suggest they are child molesters, knowing what you know about Josh?”

The myth that ending transgender discrimination will lead to male child molesters dressing up as women in order to prey on girls is not only bigoted but based on the "stranger danger" myth: "According to numbers provided by the National Association of Adult Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse, the vast majority of children who are sexually abused are abused by someone they know -- most often a family member, an adult the family trusts or, in some instances, another child." And Michelle Duggar had very evidence of this fact in her own home! (But given her fundamentalist Christianity, she's probably a creationist too, I doubt she's well-informed about the scientific method at all.)  When her daughters were molested, the perpetrator was their own older brother, not the mythological cross-dressing male adult child predator. The anti-transgender "bathroom/locker room argument" uses the same slippery slope logical fallacy as Rick Santorum's infamous "man on child, man on dog" argument against same-sex marriage. (And can you believe there are people in this country who want Santorum as president? Sure, I have issues with Obama, but Santorum as president? I'd rather live in China where political dissent like in my blog is censored, than in America with a homophobic theocrat as president.)

Oh, Josh Duggar himself. Until he resigned after his past molestations were publicized, Josh Duggar was executive director of FRC Action, the political action committee of the Family Research Council. So Duggar - a heterosexual Christian who admittedly molested children - advocated for an organization whose president Tony Perkins has asserted there is "a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia." Which is complete pseudoscientific hokum.

A child abuse investigator in Illinois who blogs as QuadCityPat also has some insights as to what could have happened if Josh Duggar's parents promptly reported their son's behavior to law enforcement:

Jim Bob and Michelle talked about being devastated when they found out.  The did send Josh away for a while, but paid no mind to the trauma their daughters experienced.  If this had been handled properly at the time Josh and his sisters would have been sent to specialized treatment for offenders and victims. 

...

Since the Duggar's failed all of their children miserably, here's what should be happening now.  If this case was in Illinois, there would be a hotline report on Josh's own children for Risk of Sexual Abuse.  This is taken when an offender has access and it is unknown if he has completed treatment and or an evaluation determining that he is at low or no risk to reoffend.  

...Jim Bob and Michelle still allow Josh to be around his siblings who are still minors, so a report of risk would be taken on  them too.  If Josh sees an evaluator who determines him to be low risk, the reports would be unfounded. If not he would be indicated (founded) as would the elder Duggars and the family would be ordered into counseling.

Thankfully, Americans aren't buying into the junk science peddled by the anti-gay industry's snake oil sellers like Josh Duggar, Tony Perkins, Peter LaBarbera, etc. anymore. Josh Duggar "repented" for being a child molester by working for an organization that tars LGBT's as child molesters. Michelle Duggar took out her grief  by projecting her son's misdeeds on a group of people she tarred as sexual deviants. The Duggars made their fortune selling themselves as an exceptionally large but still Cleaver-like family. But now that their image has been revealed to be the result of a decade-long cover-up, it is time for the Duggars' gravy train to end. The parents put their quest for fame over the welfare of their daughters. If there is a God, TLC would disassociate from these hucksters now.

E-40's Warriors remix of "Choices" and the state of hip hop today

Warning: Some mature content follows. Reader discretion is advised.

So I recently discovered E-40's Golden State Warriors version of "Choices".

Which make me want to rant about the state of hip hop today. I thought things would've changed after people got tired of the crunk/snap music garbage of my junior high/high school years (2003-2009), by whose tail's end the influence of corporate media like MTV and BET gave way to online media (MySpace, HipHopDX, YouTube...) where young people could be exposed to higher quality music of present and past. Look at the mainstream success of newer, quality artists like Macklemore, Kendrick Lamar, and J. Cole, and veterans Kanye West and Jay-Z continuing to put out music done with care, not hype in mind. But now, it seems that something like 85-90% of songs that get most hype on YouTube or FM radio have this formula:

Beat: DJ Mustard style minimalist beat with drum machine, "hey hey" chants, and the same 3-4 synth chords.

Lyrics: Recycling the same crap from last decade about partying, sexual fantasies, dealing drugs, hustling-for-money-because-I-was-deprived-as-a-child, etc. themes. OK, even "real hip hop" like Notorious BIG or Mobb Deep rapped about that stuff. But at least they put *creativity* in producing their songs (which I'll go over next).

Flow: On one hand, I like how E-40 rewrote his song to pay tribute to the Warriors. On the other, the flow here lacks the punch of his classics like "1-Luv" or "Rapper's Ball" and instead turns to the lazy "talk-n-chant" flow of a song like Big Tymers' "Oh Yeah". At least when DMX rapped in "Ruff Ryders' Anthem", the song works as well without the "what?" at the end of every line because the lyrics have a varied # of syllables/pace per line.

And expanding on a point made earlier. There's a reason why I'll say, when discussing music, that a song like "Trap Queen" is trash while a song like "Survival of the Fittest" by Mobb Deep is art. Compare & contrast the lyrics, first to "Trap Queen":

Seen your pretty ass soon as you came in that door
I just wanna chill, got a sack for us to roll
Married to the money, introduced her to my stove
Showed her how to whip it, now she remixin' for low
She my trap queen, let her hit the bando
We be countin' up, watch how far them bands go
We just set a goal, talkin' matchin' Lambos

Vs. "Survival of the Fittest":

You shook cause ain't no such things as halfway crooks
They never around when the beef cooks in my part of town
It's similar to Vietnam
Now we all grown up and old, and beyond the cop's control
They better have the riot gear ready
Tryin' to bag me and get rocked steady
By the mac one-double, I touch you
And leave you with not much to go home wit'

And the artistry is far different: Fetty Wap sings his song with that dreaded vocal effect, Auto-Tune. Didn't Jay-Z declare "Death to Auto-Tune" back in 2009? Regarding "Trap Queen": Every line has the same structure, same number of syllables. In contrast, Mobb Deep (a duo) vary their flow: some long lines, a short line, another long line, then a series of slightly shorter lines, all while keeping to the beat!

Speaking of beats, "Trap Queen" has, like "Choices", the typical dumbed-down beat of commercial rap, with the drum machine and recycled synth sounds. In contrast, "Survival of the Fittest" doesn't condescend to the listener, as the percussion sounds like real drums (even if created with a drum machine most likely), and the beat has a variety of instrumentation (keyboard, with the occasional brass), which put together with the lyrics grab the listener's attention.

Geez, how bad can things get? Well, "Throw Sum Mo" by Rae Sremmurd featuring Nicki Minaj and Young Thug is basically a melody-less, Auto-Tune-polluted strip club anthem, obviously for teenagers stuck at home at night because they can't legally go to the clubs (and grown-ups too cheap to pay the cover charge).

"Hot N****a" by Bobby Shmurda - this ain't music either, just throwing around "N-word this, B-word that, selling crack there, insert sexually explicit reference elsewhere" to appeal to his brain-dead fans' base instincts. Oh, by buying his music, you're supporting a guy who is "charged with conspiracy to commit murder, multiple weapons possession, and reckless endangerment as part of a 15-person, 69-count indictment that included his brother Javese and fellow GS9 label-mate Rowdy Rebel."

I could go on, but I think I've said my peace.

You want a "party"/upbeat rap song that at least maintains musical integrity and does the crazy thing,  respecting women? Try:

• "Around the Way Girl" by LL Cool J;
• "Going Back to Cali" by LL Cool J;
• "Can't Get Enough" by J. Cole featuring Trey Songz;
• "Ante Up" by M.O.P.

And for "minimalist" music with softer beats AND TALENT:

• "Adorn" by Miguel;
• "Lotus Flower Bomb" by Wale featuring Miguel;
• "Thinkin' Bout You" by Frank Ocean;
• "I Need Love" by LL Cool J.

Look. You can call me an old man yapping from his rocking chair all you want. But if you want to know why "rap music" is associated with hypersexuality, crime, and low quality, I think I've made my case.

CBS 1989 voiceover over "This Is America, Charlie Brown" end credits promoted "Dallas" episode about a "failed drug deal"

Previously I posted about the Parents Television Council's misleading claim about ABC's transition between You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown and a sex scene in the show Scandal.

Well, well, well. I was on Youtube watching network closing credits/intershow sequences from the '80s and '90s. The great thing about Youtube is that you can see primetime TV as it used to be, as it seems to be the repository for people to upload their old off-air video recordings. And I stumbled upon this video with the closing credits/commercial breaks for the CBS March 10, 1989 broadcast of This Is America, Charlie Brown. At the 0:14 mark - marked in the URL for your convenience (just add &t=XmXs after the YouTube video URL to make the video start at whichever time marker you wish, M for minutes and S for seconds and X for any number 0 to 60) - the closing credits roll. Shortly, the end credits drum & pipes music (sounds like a 4th of July marching band) gets quiet as the voice over announcer says, "Later tonight, a failed drug deal opens the door for J.R. to ruin the competition. A night of surprises on Dallas."

Ya see that? Quite a jump right there. Following a kids' cartoon special touting great American inventors and before another family oriented special Marvin: Baby of the Year, many kids must've been like, "Mommy, what's a drug deal?" (No word how many of them suffered negative consequences such as, y'know, prison time 25 years after.) And startled parents lie with a reference to the drugstore.

The PTC argued against ABC's scheduling of the Charlie Brown specials in their "Worst of the Week" review of last week's Scandal episode:

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence.

...

 The ABC network appeals to different audiences on different days of the week. No one is questioning whether Scandal and the other Shonda Rhimes’ dramas, are meant for adults. The creator herself admits that she does not “self-censor” based on principle. The fact remains that ABC advertised and aired a program meant for young children and families to view and they intentionally aired an episode of a series that is clearly meant for adults. On any other day of the week, ABC’s programming is significantly less violent and sexually explicit than on Thursdays. Which begs the question, what is the system the networks use to determine which shows are to air at what times? Until a more consistent representation of a family oriented primetime block is established, ABC’s Scandal will remain the Worst TV Show of the Week.

The ABC network appeals to different audiences on different days of the week. No one is questioning whether Scandal and the other Shonda Rhimes’ dramas, are meant for adults. The creator herself admits that she does not “self-censor” based on principle. The fact remains that ABC advertised and aired a program meant for young children and families to view and they intentionally aired an episode of a series that is clearly meant for adults. On any other day of the week, ABC’s programming is significantly less violent and sexually explicit than on Thursdays. Which begs the question, what is the system the networks use to determine which shows are to air at what times? Until a more consistent representation of a family oriented primetime block is established, ABC’s Scandal will remain the Worst TV Show of the Week. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpuf

The PTC's call for a "more consistent...family oriented primetime block" as well as concern about the Charlie Brown show being before more mature shows is flawed, due to various factors in primetime network programming and marketing:

• The networks typically show the Charlie Brown holiday specials whether Great Pumpkin or A Charlie Brown Christmas at most 7 days before the respective holidays. In this case, ABC showed Great Pumpkin on Oct. 30, the night before Halloween. This way, the show reaches a potentially larger audience of families on Oct. 30 as opposed to Oct. 31 when children will more likely trick-or-treat than watch TV.
• Also, could ABC have shown Great Pumpkin any other night? No, since the specials would've pre-empted other youth-oriented, higher-rated 8pm shows that the PTC would favor...
• Sunday: Once Upon a Time (not to mention being up against Sunday Night Football on NBC as well)
• Monday:   Dancing with the Stars
• Tuesday: The Great Halloween Fright Flight, a show that got the PTC's "Best of the Week" award.
• Wednesday: The Middle (a show that the PTC has awarded multiple "Best of the Week" reviews) and The Goldbergs

The Charlie Brown specials pre-empted Grey's Anatomy that week. Grey's Anatomy is in its 10th season by now and is still often in the top 25 weekly ratings, so the show has marketed itself enough to the primetime audience, to take weeks off. (Think about how Greg Popovich rests his "Big Three" players Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker a few games a year for the San Antonio Spurs.)  Sheesh, I can't help but think the PTC is becoming increasingly intellectually lazy in its analysis of TV, for an organization that claims to have the "world's largest archive of prime-time network television" dating back to 1989.

But to my greater point. It's not a new trend for networks to put kid friendly primetime specials right before the grown-ups' shows as my example of scheduling This Is America, Charlie Brown and Marvin: Baby of the Year before Dallas in March 1989 shows. Also, for more recent times, I wonder if the PTC complained about:

• Dec. 18, 2012: Happy Endings, a show the PTC doesn't recommend for viewers under 18 due to frequent sexual content, following A Charlie Brown Christmas on ABC?
• Or Dec. 2, 2010, when Grey's Anatomy followed Santa Claus Is Comin' To Town on ABC?
• Dec. 8, 2008: A 2-hour Boston Legal followed Charlie Brown Christmas on ABC. The PTC's take on Boston? "Offensive sexual content is the show’s primary concern. Denny Crane in particular makes many jokes of a sexual nature."

And even in the supposedly more innocent pre-1990s eras,

• Dec. 11, 1987: Dallas followed Charlie Brown Christmas and How the Grinch Stole Christmas on CBS (both holiday specials' rights transferred to ABC by the millennium).  If the PTC were around in the '80s, it'd be frequently trashing Dallas as "Worst of the Week" given the kind of storylines in the show and pretty much any soap opera.
• Dec. 19, 1990: Crime drama Jake and the Fatman followed Charlie Brown Xmas.
• Another interesting juxtaposition. During commercial breaks of ABC's Dec. 16, 1987 broadcast of A Muppet Family Christmas, there was a promo for Sledge Hammer! showing a character firing a gun in a police station then looking at the barrel as the announcer says, "Sledge lets his gun do the talking." An anthromorphized gun with a barrel moving like a mouth says, "read my lips." Definitely not a good advertising fit for a special featuring Sesame Street characters. What's worse? That ad was right after a kiddie cereal ad with a  young girl and animated animals. Source: 44:44 of this video.

Even for a non-profit organization, the PTC's Charlie Brown/Scandal snafu - whose main piece of evidence they've yet to acknowledge is an edited video -  sounds awfully much like those misleading clickbait stories peddled by money-grubbing-by-misleading-readers sites like Buzzfeed, The Blaze, or Huffington Post. I wonder if the PTC is really that desperate for attention and donations?

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpuf

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpuf

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpuf

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dp

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpu

The ABC network is really at fault in this situation because they are ultimately responsible for the content that actually makes it to broadcast. But it doesn’t seem like anyone at ABC cares whether or not a beloved family-friendly Peanuts cartoon should be shown immediately before an adult themed drama rated TV-14 for suggestive dialogue, offensive language, with depictions of sex and violence. - See more at: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/News/Detail.aspx?docID=3189#sthash.ojuTc1PZ.dpuf

Parents Television Council misleads about ABC's broadcast of "Scandal" after "You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown"

For an organization that claims to "promote and restore responsibility and decency to the entertainment industry in answer to America's demand for positive, family-oriented television programming," maybe a little bit of something called honesty should come with that mission. And heck, maybe the PTC themselves ought to exercise "responsibility" as well.

Why? It turns out...the PTC lied about ABC. H/T: Kristin Dos Santos of E! Online:

"Shame on ABC for putting a peep show next to a playground. In less than 26 seconds we were taken from the Peanuts pumpkin patch to a steamy Scandal sex scene," PTC president Tim Winter said.

Along with their statement, the PTC included a link to this video, which shows a quick flash of a Marvel commercial and then the start of Scandal, with a little bit of swimming in a pool and then Kerry Washington and Scott Foley in bed together... [video embedded in link]

Well, we checked back on to our own DVR's, and oddly enough, we had a distinctively different transition than the PTC's clip, with a longer transition from the end of Charlie Brown to Scandal. Our transition was about 30 seconds longer. Check it out…[video also embedded in link]

Wow.  So those who watched the PTC's video (which now has become the outrage-of-the-day on sites like The Blaze that aren't exactly known for journalistic integrity) get a misleading impression. The PTC's video, which is embedded on the Dos Santos article, edited out most of the split-screen end credits so that the viewer sees the last scene of You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown, then a sequence "an all-new Scandal starts now" (with the copyright boilerplate for Charlie Brown underneath). But the unedited network recording provided by Dos Santos shows two network promos between the last Charlie Brown scene and first Scandal scene superimposed over the Charlie Brown end credits: first a promo for an upcoming Marvel Comics special then a trailer promoting the new Scandal episode.

(Edit 11/6) Just realized that ABC had another Charlie Brown show between It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown (8pm) and Scandal at 9pm. At 8:30 was You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown. Which makes Winter's statement about being "taken from the Peanuts pumpkin patch to a steamy Scandal sex scene" even less accurate.

Given these facts, do you really buy into PTC president Tim Winter's statement: "Unless parents had the remote control in their hand, thumb on the button and aimed directly at the TV screen, they didn't have a chance [to change the channel]"? So far, the PTC has been getting some flak over their poutrage on Facebook such as:

"New Scandal Next" shows for at LEAST 4 seconds, bottom left. These adverts are usually at least 10-15 seconds long, if not longer. You should know Scandal is not a children's show, therefore they should have been removed before the preview even began. Swimming starts at 11.8 seconds, in this video, meaning you knew scandal was starting for at least ~30 seconds.. Scene begins at 31.6 seconds. So almost an entire minute after you know scandal is coming on, and a preview has started, you failed to stop your children from watching the TV.

To me, this says you weren't watching your children and let them sit in front of the TV without you around, then you heard the noise from the show, were like wtf, and got mad you suck at parenting when your kids watched a mature scene on the tube. Or, you don't care what your children watch 

with/without you as long as it doesn't involve this kind of mature setting.

 And:

PTC must running low on funds, they're plucking this chicken for all its worth. I guess they missed the TV rating in the first frame of a show that's in its third season.

Also:

I see all the complaints and have read only one offered solution. I would like to know what should ABC have done? What would have satisfied the PTC? What would have been considered the "right" thing to do?

My opinion, ABC did what it was suppose to do. They warned Scandal was coming up next, they posted the TV rating, and they aired the show at its normal and appropriate time. I know the PTC parents are fully aware of what show content is like during the 8 pm - 10 pm hours so, in my opinion, the parents should have been present to shut off the tv once Charlie Brown ended and yes you had plenty of time if you were in the same room with your children when it ended.

And:

If you watch the video just after Charlie Brown ends a commercial starts and it then appears as though it was fast forwarded because it jumps from "Tuesday" and showing Iron Man to the Scandal slate screen and "New Scandal starts now on ABC" and there was more than enough time to change the channel or turn the tv off. I know I had plenty of time between the time the show I was watching, on another channel, ended and the time Scandal started to change the channel and not miss any of Scandal and even saw the slate screen. ABC shows Charlie Brown every year in a prime time slot and then goes straight back to their normal programming so parents should have known that and made sure to be in the room and ready to change the channel or turn off the tv after Charlie Brown ended. Quit complaining and take responsibility for yourself, your children, and both of your actions.

And:

I just watched the transition. You can't be serious. ABC has an AD for Scandal in the bottom right hand corner, so it is not any sort of surprise AND Scandal has a clearly marked TV-14 rating box in the top corner. It was clear as day what was coming up. If you don't want your kids seeing that, CHANGE THE CHANNEL. You're the Parents Television Council. Do some parenting before you complain about TV.

I wonder who has more relevance in this era, the PTC or (to dig in '90s nostalgia memories, since the PTC was founded in 1995) - Deep Blue Something? It's OK for the PTC to criticize Scandal and recommend against parents letting their children watch it. But to mislead its members of how ABC showed a risque show right after Charlie Brown? No wonder the PTC isn't relevant anymore (besides Netflix and Hulu presenting a market threat to traditional broadcast/cable nowadays).

Columbus Day and hero worship

So today is Columbus Day in the United States. The day is named after Spanish explorer Christopher Columbus, whose voyages to the Americas initiated Spanish colonization in the continental region. Many public schools and governments observe this holiday.

Even though Columbus's only voyage in the modern U.S. lands is in the Caribbean territories like Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, the greater nation considers the Columbian voyages significant enough in US and continental American history to honor Columbus with a holiday. Beneath the celebration of the voyages lies a darker side to Columbus and his followers. Generally, Columbus was a perpetual violator of human rights. Among his sins: slave trading, religious proselytization, and spreading diseases that contributed to the deaths of many indigenous peoples wherever Columbus went.

Already, the cities of Seattle and Minneapolis have recognized the darker side of Columbus and have decided to recognize the 2nd Monday of October as "Indigenous People's Day" instead. Obviously, in today's fast-paced, must-post-my-thoughts-on-Facebook-now society where kneejerk reactions take precedent over critical thinking whenever long-held traditions or conceptions are challenged, the mainstream reaction to the Minneapolis and Seattle moves is a big load of derp, like "why aren't those cities focusing on the real issues of the day" or "typical libtard political correctness", without touching the concerns that the city councils had about Columbus Day in the first place.

When people idolize notable individuals, they tend to think that the accomplishments of the individual outweighs the flawed baggage, in this case Columbus. No one denies that Columbus changed the world very significantly. All that those who advocate "Indigenous People's Days" ask for is to think about the consequences of Columbus's actions. Also, the people that media, teachers, whoever teach us to respect and see as great almost always have flaws.

If you're reading this from the UK, you probably know about Jimmy Savile. The TV presenter had been a respected part of UK popular culture from the '60s to '90s and used his celebrity to raise lots of money for charities and hospitals. When Savile died in 2011, young and old Britons paid their tributes to Savile whether they knew about Savile from watching him introduce musical performers on Top of the Pops (1964-1979) or his "make a wish for kids" show Jim'll Fix It (1975-1994).

But soon, Britons' fond memories of Savile turned into utter disgust and disappointment. In September 2012, while Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were the top newsmakers in America, across the Atlantic, some quite disturbing revelations about the late Savile's past became a daily top story. It turned out that Savile was a serial child molester throughout his years as a BBC TV presenter. His celebrity intimidated his victims or potential witnesses from reporting his crimes to police; whenever police did question Savile (in the late 2000s) it was far too late for any real prosecution to take place.

Today, the San Francisco 49ers beat the St. Louis Rams on Monday Night Football. The arrests of multiple 49ers players over the 2014 offseason has been frequently reported in Bay Area media. Most controversially, Ray McDonald continues to play for the 49ers despite being arrested for domestic violence (but charges are still pending as of now). Aldon Smith is currently serving a nine-game suspension for multiple violations of NFL rules that stem from a drunk driving conviction as well as arrests for other crimes like illegal guns and a bomb threat. And, Chris Culliver is still playing for the Niners despite being criminally charged and sued for a hit-and-run (allegedly also for threatening his victims with brass knuckles). All these men were also part of the 49ers defensive squad that helped the team to the past two NFC championship games and the 2013 Super Bowl. But are they really people worth idolizing, now?

Let's not blindly make heroes out of notable figures in history or culture. We've got to take honest, realistic evaluations of the lives that our "heroes" lead.

Readers' takes on which artists have fallen off after the '90s

On NYE I wrote about hip hop/R&B artists who I think have gotten stale after 1999. Zuodi sends me his list:

• Joe
• Dr. Dre
• Wyclef Jean
• Nelly Furtado
• Shyne
• Lauryn Hill

Here are my responses/comments:

•  Joe: I first heard Joe when I was 11. The song was the remix of "Stutter" that featured Mystikal; I thought Mystikal's rapping was very scary back then. In my freshman year of high school I then discovered "Still Not a Player" by Big Pun featuring Joe, who sang the chorus of "Don't Want to Be a Player" for Pun's song. The following year  I joined the "4 Elements" hip hop club in high school (where I met Zuodi) I began listening to Golden Age music, including the song that the "Stutter" remix sampled, "Passin' Me By" by the Pharcyde. Eventually I stopped listening to Joe; I have just now learned about his '90s songs like "All the Things (Your Man Won't Do)" from the 1996 movie Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood. Definitely Joe sounded more original in the '90s than '00s, especially since Joe began collaborating with talentless hacks like G-Unit and was a featured artist on Mariah Carey's horrible 2002 album Charmbracelet. And apparently Joe had a single "If I Was Your Man" in 2007...of all the time I spent from 2005-2008 listening to KMEL I don't think I even remember that song!
• Dr. Dre: In the past decade, Dre has been doing more producing than MC'ing, so I don't know if he really "fell off" this decade. In the early 2000s he had some decent productions like "Family Affair" by Mary J. Blige and "Let Me Blow Ya Mind" by Eve featuring Gwen Stefani...both of which are way better than any Nicki  Minaj "you a stupid hoe, you a you a stupid hoe" songs you heard on the radio. Unfortunately, Dre was responsible for spawning 50 Cent's sellout Get Rich or Die Tryin', a dull, lifeless drop from 50 Cent's earlier underground career (like "How to Rob", "Ghetto Quran", or "Your Life's on the Line"). And of course 50 Cent pretty much tarnished mainstream hip hop for the next 5 or so years...hip hop became more meaningless with all the Lil Jons, Soulja Boys, D4L's, Gucci Manes, and every crunk/auto tune/ringtone crapper. At least Dre, from his experience behind the Golden Age of Hip Hop, managed to produce music better than most, such as "How We Do" by the Game or "Like Toy Soldiers by Eminem. Finally, Detox, the forever-delayed album that fans have waited for near a decade now.
• Wyclef Jean: Like I made my case earlier with Q-Tip from A Tribe Called Quest, Jean was best when he was with the Fugees. His solo stuff has been very uninteresting, and I've got to question his creative streak with his 2007 single "Sweetest Girl (Dollar Bill)" where the chorus sung by Akon straight up rips off Wu-Tang's "C.R.E.A.M."...and did Wyclef really have to bring in Lil Wayne of all rappers in the song? If not for the alleged misuse of funds, I would have praised Jean for his recent humanitarian work in this blog.
• Nelly Furtado: Oh my, please don't take me back to the bad old days of 2006 and 2007 when "Promiscuous" and "Maneater" got non stop airplay on every top-40 radio station in the country. Apparently she had an indie career in the late '90s since her senior year of HS and also sang on a Jurassic 5 album in 2002. I haven't heard too much from Furtado after she was on Timbaland's 2009 album, so I guess going dance-pop in 2006 must've hurt her musical reputation a lot.
• Shyne: I don't listen to Shyne so I can't comment about him. But because of the December 1999 nightclub shooting (where Puff Daddy and Jennifer Lopez were present), Shyne never even had a real career beyond album releases of super-old recordings in the 2000s.
• Lauryn Hill: Hill, also of the Fugees, hasn't released very much new music since her MTV Unplugged concert in 2001. Again I can't comment since I don't listen to Hill beyond the Fugees or The Mis-Education.

Robb also commented on my facebook page where I posted my original blogpost: "Lil wayne has had numerous great albums in the last 10 years. Usher is still popular but I like his old stuff way more." I guess Robb means the Wayne mixtapes like Da Drought series. And glad to hear someone agrees regarding Usher.

Some 90-stalgia: Which hip hop/R&B stars from back in the day have fallen off now?

I'm thinking of such a list because of that new song "Put It Down" by Brandy featuring Chris Brown. I think Brandy was better when she was up-and-coming in the '90s with "I Wanna Be Down" (geez, how many Brandy songs have the word "down"????) and "Baby". Her song with Kanye back in '04 "Talk About Our Love" is mediocre. The aforementioned singles are the only Brandy songs I'd ever keep in my mp3 player. Oh yeah, the talentless hack Ray J (with a terrible singing voice and star of the Kim Kardashian sex tape) is her younger brother (Ray J's real name is William Ray Norwood Jr.).

So I've decided as a new year comes and hip hop progressively gets worse (but at least the fact that Kendrick Lamar's new album Good Kid, MAAD City has outsold 2 Chainz' Based on a TRU Story I have hope...and the new GOOD Music compilation Cruel Summer is also pushing 100k's of units) I wonder how many rappers or R&B singers who were in their prime in the '90s are just stale in the new millennium?

- Usher: I like "You Make Me Wanna" and "Nice & Slow" from his breakout 1997 album My Way. And I just now discovered his debut single recorded when he was just 13, "Call Me a Mack" (from the soundtrack of the 1993 film that starred Tupac and Janet Jackson, Poetic Justice). In his '90s songs, Usher even rapped verses! 8701 (2001) was alright, Confessions (2004) was way overplayed in its time and was a step downward because now I think "Burn" is essentially "U Got It Bad" with more RPM. "Caught Up" is better though. Oh, one time I was listening to Detroit's hip hop/R&B station WJLB on iHeartRadio (another sign I need to go back to Michigan, haven't been there since May 1997) and heard Maxwell's "Fortunate" and that was the first time in my life I realized that "U Got It Bad" interpolated the chorus of "Fortunate". Nowadays Usher always puts out party music as singles, like "Love In This Club" [2008] with a beat ripped off of GarageBand software! Then he hopped on the Auto-Tune bandwagon in 2010 with "OMG" featuring will.i.am and did a super poppy club anthem "DJ Got Us Falling in Love" with Pitbull (a rapper who's a traitor to his genre, but that's a whole 'nother story). And "Hey Daddy (Daddy's Home)" went far on the raunchy side especially with annoying rapper Plies. I'm not too fond of "What Happened to U", ESPECIALLY since if you were listening to radio the beginning fools you into thinking you're hearing "One More Chance" by the Notorious BIG! "Hot Tottie" (2010) rips off the beat of Jay-Z's "On to the Next One". Usher has had a HUGE creativity issue for the past several years.

- Members of the Wu-Tang Clan: 8 Diagrams (2007) was one hell of a generic album...nothing that Wu-Tang or its members does in the future will ever KO Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) (1993), Wu-Tang Forever (1997), Method Man's Tical (1995), Raekwon's Only Built 4 Cuban Linx (1995), etc.

- Fat Joe: I can listen to his 90s songs like "The Shit Is Real", "John Blaze", "Flow Joe", "Watch Out", or his parts in songs like "Twinz (Deep Cover '98)" on repeat especially with the heavy, deep, street lyrics and flow with genuine hip hop beats. However, Fat Joe became way too commercial and generic after J.O.S.E. in 2001 especially with getting pop-&-B singers like R. Kelly and Ashanti singing hooks. From that album "My Lifestyle" is a hard track, but "We Thuggin'" is just guilty pleasure even though hearing that song on KMEL back in October 2001 helped me get into hip hop when I was younger. "What's Luv?" wears out as well. Loyalty (2002) was a very low creative point before Fat Joe returned in 2004 for the second Terror Squad album True Story with number-one hit "Lean Back". He went solo again All or Nothing (2005), the lead single featuring Nelly "Get It Poppin" is wack but the album had other harder tracks like "So Much More" or the anti-50 Cent song "My Fofo". Me Myself & I (2006) marked the time when Fat Joe abandoned his NYC roots for the trendy Southern sound in "Make It Rain" featuring Lil Wayne and then doing guest performances on DJ Khaled's album. Even the deeper cuts like "Damn" and "The Profit" were getting more dull. The Elephant in the Room (2008) = rock bottom. I was never into "I Won't Tell", which sounded more like POP MUSIC than hip hop (especially since pop-&-B J. Holiday sang). Even the deeper cuts like "K.A.R" and "The Fugitive" were getting generic and tiresome. And look what the hell Fat Joe is doing now with super-lame party music like "Another Round" with Chris Brown (tell me again WHY he still gets prominent spots after beating Rihanna?) and not even "Pride N Joy" featuring Kanye and a bunch of others like Jadakiss and Mos Def is worth listening. "Instagram That Hoe"? By the title itself that's straight garbage. Fat Joe has been using the same old same old formula for theme and rapping for nearly 7 years now. How many songs about hot women, the club, and luxuries can he do creatively anymore? At age 42 maybe he should think about doing less music.

- Master P or any other artist signed with No Limit Records: I remember hearing "We Like Them  Girls" by Silkk  the Shocker on the radio in 2004 (when I was in 8th grade and basically liking pretty much any crap I heard on Wild 94.9 or 106 KMEL). At that time I'd also discovered "Make Em Say Uhh" by Master P on the compilation album MTV the First 1000 Years: Hip Hop & then thru sites like MSN Music and Amazon.com the other No Limit rappers and other songs they did in the late '90s such as: "Bout It Bout It" by Master P and "I Got the Hook Up" by MP. Thinking back on it, there's a reason why Master P and the other No Limit rappers ended up on Koch Records (which later became E1 Music). I mean, how is Master P's "Them Jeans" (2004) any different from Lil Jon's "Get Low" (2002)?

- Lil Wayne: A rapper since 1993 (when he was just 11), Wayne found his big break in 2008 with Tha Carter III. Sadly in order to achieve such a high-sales album with many Grammys and top singles Wayne abandoned his gangsta rap sound from his earlier career for a more mainstream (and of course the dreaded AUTO TUNE) sound. Examples of Wayne's earlier stuff from Cash Money Records: "The Block Is Hot" (1999),  or go to 0:55 for his part in B.G.'s "Bling Bling" (1999), or 1:00 for his verse in "From Tha 13th to Tha 17th" when he was known as "Baby D" in rap duo The B.G.'z back in 1995 (when Wayne was only 13), or 3:20 at "I Need a Hot Girl" (with his group Hot Boys in 1999). In 2004 Wayne's rapping style became softer and more structured, like in "Bring It Back" and "Go DJ" (both '04) and "Fireman" and "Hustler Musik" (2005). Wayne's career took an interesting turn in 2006. That year he did just mixtapes and guest performances: both on the poppier side ("You" by Lloyd, "Make It Rain" by Fat Joe, the remix of "Gimme That" by Chris Brown) and on the street side (like the anti-George W. Bush mixtape cut "Georgia Bush"). And then in 2007 came The Leak EP with such underground tracks like "I'm Me". Unfortunately in 2008 when I first heard "Lollipop" on the radio with all the auto tune I knew Lil Wayne went beyond selling out. Things only got worse with his fake "rock" album Rebirth in 2009 (STILL with that auto tune), Wayne putting Drake in the spotlight, and the very boring album I Am Not a Human Being  in 2010. These days Lil Wayne is doing far more lame pop music like "How To Love", "Right Above It", or "Mrs. Officer" than tracks where he actually cares about rapping like in "John" or "6 Foot 7 Foot".

- Members of A Tribe Called Quest: Tribe was VERY great when they were together in the 90s. However the solo stuff that Tribe members put out isn't very memorable. "Gettin' Up" by Q-Tip was better than any of the mainstream hip hop overplayed on radio back in '08. But does that stand up to Tribe classics like "Scenario", "Buggin' Out", "I Left My Wallet in El Segundo"? NO!

- R. Kelly: Transformed from slow jam soul singer in the early 90s ("Bump n Grind") to mainstream urban contemporary singer in the late 90s ("Home Alone") to straight up baller in the 00s and beyond (his many many guests spots/collabos with rappers). Oh, don't forget that child porn trial too. R. Kelly's attempt at being everything to every audience gave him a whole bunch of repetitive uncreative stereotypical mainstream rap songs..."Supaman High", "That's That", the Jay-Z collaboration albums. "Playas Only", etc.

Any others? Comment below.