ToraToraDreams said:

My mom bought me the 1999 LP and brought it home with her on the bus (she doesn't drive). Someone pointed out what the number "1" was on the cover but she bought it anyway. I was 10 years old!

EmeraldSkies said:

They were around before 2LC, but a lot of record stores were sent "stickers" to label the stock they already had. Some stores didn't comply for obvious first amendment reasons.

But, you are right that 2 Live Crew was one of the prime examples (that album was actually labeled "obscene"). The other prime example was Body Count w/Cop Killer on it.

Se7en said:

Ah! well I wasn't really buying alot or music that required PA,so that's probably why I did'nt really notice it,but I do remember 2LC being on TV because of their music,and trying to I think not have their music labeled.

CHRISLUV92 said:

That wouldn't be any fun unless we were all cuddled up on a couch together...You know I'm kidding...I hope.

pplrain said:

That is a great Motherly point of view...although, emotional consequences are involved is sexual engagement at any level. The truth is...that Mom and Dad aren't in the backseat when you are falling in puppy love.

Se7en said:

I suppose, as far as distributed recordings are concerned...however...Movies were explicit long before, sexy ideas were introduced to audio...I remember watching "Caligula," on HBO when I was 11.
With history as a root...It's hard to pinpoint, abused sexual behavior.

Pinning Prince for being responsible for a specific sexual expression is not fair. Even when I agree to a point on behalf of "The undiscipled child." Because where the movie is concerned....Prince allowed himself open to this type of criticism by performing as a sex object...
At the theatre, you don't have the easy luxury of skipping over something that may offend a child.

The Bottom line is...and has to be...That regardless of your age...you will come in contact with sexual understanding...And the knowlege...That it is between Masterbation and Orgies...That true love exists.

Tame said:

We're not pinning Prince for his musical expression, not at all.

We are just saying that "Darling Nikki" was the catalyst for Tipper Gore to start those CD labels. It's a fact, indisputable. She bought the Purple Rain album for her daughter, and was outraged when she heard the lyrics to Darling Nikki. Up to that point, she only knew the radio hits off that album and they were totally safe.

You are right that we come into contact with sexual understanding, but some parents would like to control how/when that is introduced.

I disagree about movies -- there is a rating system in place for movies, which at least "helps" determine if the movie is acceptable for children. There is also a rating system for video games . . . the only thing missing a rating system is music. It's either explicit or it isn't.

I can see a point for and against such music labels; my only point was don't ruin the artwork for adults by adding Advisory labels. Put the label on the outside of the packaging.

Nope!

Tame said:

Se7en...I agree with the idea that Prince was the catalyts for these labels...I also believe that it wasn't thorough...I used the word, fair...It just happened to be uncharted territory for music, as you mentioned...although...movies that had been released were really the only comparison to set standards by...unless this ruling was based on the movie's version of "Darling Nikki," which kicks it up to a visual release...

That is why I question...the decision...No one has stated whether or not, this decision was based solely on the song...

I'm just trying to find out what the nitty gritty is of these decisions...and where was the movie industry when music labels were coming onto the scene...and where does freedom of speech become a responsibility to shut up? I am not directing that cockiness toward you...I direct it at the grand scheme of all that is distributed Nation wide...and World wide, now that the Internet is a factor. I just like to come to bold understandings...and I have truly not done the research. What I do know...is that everything must be lenient....

Let's narrow it down...If Tipper Gore...can be involved with labels based on what we hear? What children hear? What Christian's hear? What who hears?

Out on a bizzare limb...for a moment...

Perhaps as a Christian...I would rather hear about Nikki masterbating than hear about the guy that got shot, Maybe the crime oriented NEWS should be federally restricted to Police district television broadcasts...unless it's an Amber alert, and the community news should only be of positive importance.

I know that this kind of conversation is widespread with opinions...and I don't feel the need to play ping=pong with it...so in conclusion to this topic...I believe that this subject is fair game for a constitutional amendment.

Blowfly's 1980 12 Inch "Rapp Dirty" had an X Rated warning. Millie Jackson's 1979 "Live and Unscensored" album had an X Rated warning. So did her 1982 album "Live and Outrageous". Denise LaSalle's version of "Down Home Blues" had an X Rated warning next to the track on the back of the album. All the comedians such as Richard Pryor, LaWanda Page, Dolemite, and Redd Roxx had X Rated warnings. Prince wasn't the first.

vainandy said:

If I remember correctly, Dirty Mind had a parental warning sticker on it when it came out. It was not mandatory at the time but that was the first time I ever saw a warning sticker on an album before.

And I hope everyone understands that these stickers do not control the content of the music you hear. It is a tool for parents to use to help them make decisions and have better control over what their children are exposed to.

"Dirty Mind" sure did. It was a sticker that was on the plastic that the record was wrapped in. The sticker said....."Contains material that may be unsuitable to young listeners"....I remember that like it was yesterday because it was my first Prince album I bought. Even though I had some of Prince's 45s, seeing that sticker in the store made me want the album out of curiosity. My grandmother was with me in the store and bought it for me. I simply held the album up, with my fingers covering the sticker, showed it to my grandmother, and told her that this was the album I wanted. She looked at the picture and saw the word "Prince", she said...."OK baby....that's Freddie Prince (she thought he was Freddie Prinz)....yeah, I'll buy that for you baby"....

vainandy said:

That ain't right!

Tame said:

Gotcha. In 1984, there was no Internet (so to speak) so information was not readily available at your fingertips. Research was time-consuming and often involved libraries and mailing away.

Now, in 2008, those labels should go away. If your kid wants a 50-Cent or Eminem album, it's up to the PARENT to research it then decide if it's right for their OWN child. Don't count on the government to print millions of warning labels so that YOU will feel safe and ignorant while music shopping.

The stuff that's on the radio and MTV nowadays makes Darling Nikki tame by comparison - but yet there is no warning on the radio broadcast OR on MTV. Why is distributed music any different?

vainandy said:

As far as I know, those early warnings were done voluntarily by the record labels. They were also done in part to prevent any "on-air" radio cursings, since back then there were actually DJs who played anything they wanted.

The current Explicit Lyrics labels, on the other hand, were government-influenced and mandated.

They're right at the edge of censorship without actually crossing the line.

We can't prevent you from releasing your music, because that would be censorship.
You can release it, but only with a sticker on it.
With that sticker, you can't be sold at certain stores, thus limiting sales.
Limited sales mean fewer people who are able to hear your music.
Fewer people hearing your music (by design) is censorship.


So, it's a roundabout way of censoring, but not censoring.

Tame said:

People, and our children especially, need protection from the 'protectors'..
"Don't let ur children watch television, until they know how 2 read..."

Se7en said:

Because "distributed" music are the uncut versions.

Sowhat said:

Ahhh yes - good point!

This is why labeling music and putting parental guidence numbers on a movie box, such as PG-13...are so generalized.
The interesting point about statements like..."Mature audiences." "Explicit Lyrics" "Graphic Material" and "Nudity," can contain Essays of description. I wonder how long and drawn out...some of these things are in law-books to say everything including, you will find your red-tape out of your scenerio.