Racist. Homophobic. Misogynistic. Pro Life?

[doc]

Well, I turned down a recording session yesterday. I usually do my background checks pretty thoroughly before starting a session. In addition to finding out instrumentation, how the band is going to feel most comfortable recording, and general idea of sounds they're going for, I check to see what they're all about as far as people and what the end result of the recording will be. I had a session dumped in my lap late on Friday and was only able to talk to the artist briefly.

I've always had a litmus for whether I would record bands or not. Basically, if there are any racist, homophobic, misogynistic lyrics/attitudes or anything that makes me feel uncomfortable I first explain why I won't record them and then let them know where else they can try. I know of a few other engineers that don't care about the misogyny and homophobia of certain metal bands. I'm not friends with them, but I can tell a client how to contact them.

Well, the girl showed up yesterday with stickers on her guitar case that read, "Abortion is Homicide." I then asked her what the session was about. She told me it was Christian music. This is fine. I've recorded Christian music before and have no problem with it. However, she continued to tell me that not only was it Christian, but that the proceeds would be donated to a Catholic organization that convinces women that abortion is wrong, chastizes them if they're not married, teaches them about Christ, and then helps give them food and clothing for their baby which they have to keep.

I asked her to hang out in the studio while I frantically made phone calls in the other room looking for another engineer that was willing to record her. After explaining the situation, every engineer I talked to said there was no way they would do the session and they didn't know anyone that would. Finally, I found someone to do it. The female engineer that took the session was willing to do it not because she was supportive of the cause, but because she's young and really wanted to do her first payed session. I also had to make very clear that the artist was absolutely not allowed to put the studio's name on the credits of the cd. I explained to her why I wouldn't record her and why I was having a problem finding another engineer. I was not rude or confrontational. She explained that the lyrics weren't about abortion and I had to let her know it wasn't just about lyrical content but also how the proceeds of the cd were being used. We actually had a rational discourse about the situation and she thanked me for being honest.

This issue had never come up before with me. I was a bit surprised to find out about this at the beginning of a session, but also realized I needed to add to my list of sessions I will not record.

Do you all have litmus tests?

Is there anyone here that will record anything, no matter what?

How much background do you check before starting a session?

-Doc

[E-money]

I'm a little confused by your "litmus test"
Do you turn these various artists away because you don't agree with their views, or are you afraid to associate your studio's name with their views because it might be bad for business?

I find it humerous that you "frantically made phone calls in the other room looking for another engineer that was willing to record her". Why not dial 9-1-1 as well?



"Officer, I've got a pro-lifer down here, can you send a few squad cars over?"

[chris harris]

I'm a little confused by your "litmus test"
Do you turn these various artists away because you don't agree with their views, or are you afraid to associate your studio's name with their views because it might be bad for business?

I find it humerous that you "frantically made phone calls in the other room looking for another engineer that was willing to record her". Why not dial 9-1-1 as well?



"Officer, I've got a pro-lifer down here, can you send a few squad cars over?"

i'd guess that the answer to your first question is "both". at least it is for me.
and, it's not against the law to have unpopular beliefs. but, just because something is legal, doesn't mean that there's NO consequences for having strong and unpopular beliefs.

[thethingwiththestuff]

i'm a little confused by your "callousness towards women"

he said he was alright with her views, but the proceeds from the record were going to an organization that is very very bad. he was "frantically" calling to find someone to help this girl who was sitting around waiting. what's hard to understand?

[joelpatterson]

People are going to be people. But then, I understand how everyone has their limits.

Takes alot to ruffle my feathers, I think the bumper sticker would have to say "Engineering is Homicide!" for me to think about backing out.

But then, there was the time... not entirely off topic... when I was doing video projects in various studios...

I went in to do the audio, and the guy was telling me about this "soundtrack" he'd done for a woman who was starting up a "home schooling TV show" and this was the theme song. He had even sung on it, he was proud. I thought: how horrible, not only are these poor kids trapped in the house all day, isolated from their peers, now you're sitting them down and WATCHING TV, talk about giant steps backward!

And then later at the video post, I got there early and watched a guy finish up his "ad" for a local lawyer. And the visual was a tenement exterior, late at night, there's one light on in one window and the voice-over is all maudlin and talking about upaid bills, threats of eviction, unpaid medical bills, just a cornucopia of the kinds of problems that people get into when they let things slide. But this here lawyer can help you find someone to sue. And make it all better.

And I thought: what a wretched abuse of two fine mediums, furthering a ghastly home-schooling movement and preying on people's fears.

[doc]

Do you turn these various artists away because you don't agree with their views, or are you afraid to associate your studio's name with their views because it might be bad for business?

Yes to both, sort of. I have a general dislike for Christianity, however I understand the idea of faith; therefore, I don't really mind recording Christian music. If someone is just singing about their faith whether it be Jesus, Adonai, Buddha, Krishna, etc. I'm okay with recording it. If the lyric content is something that I find abhorrent to my very nature as a human being (again, homophobia, racism, misogyny, etc.) or the proceeds are being used for such an organization, then there is no way in hell I'm recording that project. I won't take their money and I won't help them propagate their hatred. In order to record something, I have to believe in it on some level. Otherwise I'm not putting my best effort into the recording, and the paying artist is suffering because of it.

As for bad for business? I don't want someone seeing my name or my studio's name on a CD that's about something many people at base are uncomfortable with and are generally disgusted with. You better believe if I found out a studio was recording something such as an anti-choice CD or something racist there is no way in hell my band would record there. Linking your name to a project inherently puts your stamp of approval on that CD.

I find it humerous that you "frantically made phone calls in the other room looking for another engineer that was willing to record her". Why not dial 9-1-1 as well?

The unsuspecting girl was sitting there, waiting for a session to start that up until a minute ago was booked and supposed to be starting right then. Just because I don't agree with her morals/ethics doesn't mean I'm going to be an asshole. This is not a business move, this a common curtesy/human being thing. I actually apologized to her for the "mixup" and I wanted to find an engineer as quickly as possible, even at another studio, that would help her.

-Doc

[;ivlunsdystf]

In my work (not recording, health care actually) we often serve people who are not like ourselves. As long as they do not disrespect us we let them in the door. We often end up learning something by talking to them, even if it's something we don't want to learn. Also, we appreciate the business. Anyway, it makes life and work interesting to have unusual people around.

The problem in recording is that you don't want your name attached to a project that goes against your beliefs. In that case, I think you made a fine choice to send them packing.

[curtiswyant]

As long as you're ok with turning business away for whatever reason, then more power to you. Most people don't have that luxury.

[Professor]

This has been a huge concern of mine in the ever-growing move towards some kind of "political correctness" which for me is equivalent to attempts at thought control. This nation was founded on a belief that is really so intensely contrary to human nature that it has fought over for pretty much all of recorded history.
The concept of freedom of thought.
It is very hard for any individual to be confronted with thoughts, opinions or ideas which they do not share. They feel threatened, insecure, and no matter how hard they 'try' to accomodate that person's beliefs, at their gut they want to tell them how to talk, how to feel, what to believe and how to think.

And I'm not talking about your pro-lifer... I'm sorry to say I'm talking about anyone who is afraid of what she has to say.

Freedom of speech is a difficult concept to accept because it means that you must believe that someone else has the right to say something even if you disagree. Just as much as that might mean that people would accept the rights of the individual to believe in Christ, Buddha, or Krishna, saving the whales, or feeding the hungry, free love or free abortions, I would hope that such people would not be so intolerant of free thought as to shame people who believe in chastity, marriage and living babies, or for that matter any other political view.

Free speech you see, is about letting every view point be heard so that it can live or die on the public forum. It is not about preventing someone from speaking their mind because of an intolerance about their beliefs.

There is a very old saying that I believe goes back to the military - "I may not believe in what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it."

I know that 5-hours of driving each way is a really long drive, but I hope that in the future, if you ever have another such moral dilemma, or if this one still hasn't found a studio, that you'll keep my name and number on hand as a possible location for the artist to work. I may not believe in what they have to say, but I'll help them to say it so their thoughts can be judged at the court of public opinion & acceptance, and not die a silent death to the tyranny of censorship.


And I suppose that may have come off as sounding insulting or something - really I don't mean for it to sound that way, at least not in any kind of personal way. I believe just as much in your right to refuse to work with anyone you choose. I don't care if a guy turns down Christians because they are singing pro-life songs or if he turns down Mexicans because he just doesn't like them. That's his right to freedom of speech, thought and belief. In the end, your strong opinions about the subject matter would not allow you to properly serve the artist anyway. So I do support your decision, I just know it would be different from mine.

Oh, and yes I do have folks I choose to not work with. People that insult me, my staff, or the studio, people who threaten or abuse the people, equipment or space, and people who are just pains in the ass to work with. But I also give everybody one chance, because I feel it's my responsibility as a state-owned facility.

-Jeremy

[chris harris]

free speech doesn't mean that you're free to say anything you want with absolutely no consequences. that's outrageous!

nobody is suggesting that the girl should be locked up for what she's trying to get across. that's the point. she's free to say what she wants. and, his turning down her project IS her ideas dying on the public forum. he's no more obligated to help her spread an idea that he doesn't believe in than the local newspaper is to print every word I write to them.

this isn't censorship!! that's ridiculous.

and, it's been my experience that people who complain about "political correctness" often have some pretty unpopular opinions about things. and, even if you do, you're not gonna get arrested for spouting them.

Free speech is about having the legal right to voice whatever opinion you have. And, that's all it guarantees you. It doesn't mean that you can say ANYTHING you want with ZERO consequences.

There are consequences to having unpopular opinions.

it sounds like, to you, the issue is more about pro vs. anti- choice and not free speech. would you turn down a project recording racist anthems? what about children's songs about raping kids? what about sampling "grunts" resulting from homosexual sex for an electronic project?

the PC backlash is infinitely more annoying than political correctness itself.

[Professor]

I find it interesting that you would consider people who speak up against killing babies to be the equivalent of those who talk in favor of raping babies.
That's ironic.

But I really don't want this to devolve into an argument over a single issue of politics and beliefs.

As I said, I believe that he is absolutely within his own freedom of choice to take the job or not. Indeed that's also covered in his first ammendment right to free assembly. But it is also a form of personal censorship - choosing to not allow that voice to reach the public square. Yes, the choice is based on his personal beliefs, or his fear that other business would dry up if his clients knew he did not turn down that session, but the effect is the same.
I have no problem with Doc turning down the session. I'm just saying I wouldn't.

And as for racist bands, well if a group of skin heads came to me to record, or a bunch of gangsta rappers want to sing about killing whitey, or a group of Mexicans want to make an album to support La Raza, then yeah, I'd probably allow them to record. And just the same, if a gay rock band showed up to make a fund-raiser disc to support NAMBLA, then I'd probably record that as well. Perhaps I would choose not to be identified on the album because after all, if the skin heads found out about the NAMBLA album I might lose their business.

Consider this: if a group of boy scouts show up to record camp fire songs would you turn them away because the ACLU says they're "anti-gay"?
Or, if a KKK group shows up to record camp fire songs, would you accept them because the ACLU says they have the right to march down the streets of Ohio?

Believe me, I'd have a tough moral dilemma if a group of Muslims showed up to sing Jihadist songs for a CD to support Al Qaeda, so for now I'll just have to hope that they don't.

-Jeremy

[JGriffin]

There is a very old saying that I believe goes back to the military - "I may not believe in what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it."

That's Voltaire, actually.

[hauser gabone]

ok, the proceeds are going to pro-life groups?
are the songs any good? if they are not too good, then you dont have to worry about the money being used to fund the next Eric Rudolph.
or, just start perfoming abortions at your studios

[Professor]

There is a very old saying that I believe goes back to the military - "I may not believe in what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it."

That's Voltaire, actually.

Indeed, you are correct sir. thanks. A popular sentiment for the military and the ACLU alike - how unlikely is that?

And hey, while we're at it, did anybody else notice that it's MLKing Day? weird.

-J

[JGriffin]

doc, I'm not prepared yet to weigh in publically on how I feel about your decision, though I will say I've had a few "moral dilemma" moments in my career. But one thing occured to me: this reminds me of the conservative pharmacists at Walgreen's refusing to dispense birth control prescriptions to unmarried women. It's not exactly the same (They are not the business owner after all), but if you find your reaction to the pharmacists' decision the opposite of your reaction to your own decision, that may warrant some reflection.