Rihanna's "Man Down" Video, and the Irrelevance of the Parents Television Council
A couple days ago, Rihanna released the music video for her latest single, “Man Down,” a pop-reggae song that tells the story of a young woman’s guilt and regret after murdering a man that deeply wronged her. Check out the video below.
The cinematic clip fleshes out the song’s storyline, conveying that the root of her actions is a harrowing sexual assault in an alley after a house party. The video is expertly directed and paced for maximum impact; Rihanna is effervescent and gorgeous, interacting with friends and neighbors in her small, island town. She is innocently enjoying her life until tragedy literally emerges from out of the darkness and forces itself upon her, utterly breaking her spirit.
“Man Down” is a heartbreaking, complicated and brilliant music video.
And so of course the Parents Television Council and other useless, opportunistic, media-watchdog groups are “pissed.” Go figure.
Taking a break from the arduous task of bashing Glee and The Jersey Shore, the PTC served up a press release blasting “Man Down” for the message it allegedly sends to America’s youth, lamenting, “Instead of telling victims they should seek help, Rihanna released a music video that gives retaliation in the form of premeditated murder the imprimatur of acceptability.” Then some group called Industry Ears chimed in, proclaiming, “’Man Down’ is an inexcusable, 
shock-only, shoot-and-kill theme song,” and suggested that if Chris Brown had made this video he would have been condemned for it.
Well, I’m not even going to touch the Chris Brown comment, because it’s an irrelevant low-blow at Rihanna that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
But in general, this whole “what about the children?” shit is getting completely out of hand.
Can groups like the Parents Television Council be any more irrelevant and full of shit? They don’t attack Congress for trying to defund Planned Parenthood or Public Education, i.e. two issues that actually impact the lives of America’s youth. And they’re not holding rallies to raise awareness of issues like Food Deserts or the lack or arts education in schools either.
Nope, they spend their time watching television, and then spouting off arbitrary platitudes about the harm a music video is going to do to teenagers.
At the end of the day, if you think your kid is going to try to emulate the “Man Down” video – a video where a young woman is raped and then seeks revenge on her rapist – then you need to have a long, long talk with your child.
And Rihanna should not be the center of that conversation.
And in the meantime, the Parents Television Council needs to shut the fuck up, let artists be artists, and find a cause that actually matters.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEhy-RXkNo0&feature=topvideos_music
Wow, so much anger. I’m not sure I understand the apparent agrument that because PTC and other groups like them don’t address the full spectrum of issues plaguing youth, then they have no credibility and don’t deserve to be in the debate. That’s a spurious agrugment. Many, many groups specialize, concentrating their efforts on specific issues. Take Planned Parenthood, for example. You mention that PTC isn’t out there championing the cause for PP to continue to receive government funding. What about the fact that PP advocates birth control, almost boundaryless sex, abortion, advises young people with AIDS not to disclose their status to their sexual partners. They also in some geographies offer pap smears, and other gynecological testing. But they’re not involved in advocating for affordable housing, or education for young people; they don’t sponsor or run any mentoring programs to help young woemn identify and/or achieve goals. But yet you’re not taking them to task for that. I’m not trying to just put my opinion out here; I’d really like an honest dialogue about this.
Thanks for reading.
Wow, so much anger. I’m not sure I understand the apparent agrument that because PTC and other groups like them don’t address the full spectrum of issues plaguing youth, then they have no credibility and don’t deserve to be in the debate. That’s a spurious agrugment. Many, many groups specialize, concentrating their efforts on specific issues. Take Planned Parenthood, for example. You mention that PTC isn’t out there championing the cause for PP to continue to receive government funding. What about the fact that PP advocates birth control, almost boundaryless sex, abortion, advises young people with AIDS not to disclose their status to their sexual partners. They also in some geographies offer pap smears, and other gynecological testing. But they’re not involved in advocating for affordable housing, or education for young people; they don’t sponsor or run any mentoring programs to help young woemn identify and/or achieve goals. But yet you’re not taking them to task for that. I’m not trying to just put my opinion out here; I’d really like an honest dialogue about this.
Thanks for reading.
“I’m not sure I understand the apparent agrument that because PTC and other groups like them don’t address the full spectrum of issues plaguing youth, then they have no credibility and don’t deserve to be in the debate.”
That is not my argument. The point of the article is that what PTC does is useless and misses the point. I’m not calling into question the issues they choose to address. I’m calling into question their very existence.
“You mention that PTC isn’t out there championing the cause for PP to continue to receive government funding. What about the fact that PP advocates birth control, almost boundary-less sex, abortion, advises young people with AIDS not to disclose their status to their sexual partners.”
I’m not an expert on Planned Parenthood, but I seriously doubt that they are literally advising young people to have indiscriminate sex and spread deadly, incurable STDS. That’s a little much, dontchathink?
“But they’re not involved in advocating for affordable housing, or education for young people; they don’t sponsor or run any mentoring programs to help young woemn identify and/or achieve goals. But yet you’re not taking them to task for that.”
I’m not taking Planned Parenthood to task because they are an organization with a specific goal in mind, and I find that specific goal to be valid and helpful to society at large. I respect and believe in their right to exist.
I think the Parents Television Council is bullshit because what they do (which is watch TV and then send out press releases about why *insert tv show here* is inappropriate) solves nothing and helps no one.
Art and Violence (or sex, or drugs, etc.)are not the same things. You cannot judge them the same way.
An organization that tries to make medical care affordable and accessible to the poor and underprivileged is valid. A non-profit that promotes Stop-the-Violence campaigns in the inner-city is very valid.
But an organization that tries to police and have some kind of influence on ART and its availability to the public is bullshit. Art is a reflection of our society, in all of its beauty and ugliness. Condemning art misses the point entirely.
As stated in the article, Parents should be having ongoing conversations with their children about issues like sexual assault, violence, and dating; rather than trying to make the “Man Down” music video go away.
“I’m not sure I understand the apparent agrument that because PTC and other groups like them don’t address the full spectrum of issues plaguing youth, then they have no credibility and don’t deserve to be in the debate.”
That is not my argument. The point of the article is that what PTC does is useless and misses the point. I’m not calling into question the issues they choose to address. I’m calling into question their very existence.
“You mention that PTC isn’t out there championing the cause for PP to continue to receive government funding. What about the fact that PP advocates birth control, almost boundary-less sex, abortion, advises young people with AIDS not to disclose their status to their sexual partners.”
I’m not an expert on Planned Parenthood, but I seriously doubt that they are literally advising young people to have indiscriminate sex and spread deadly, incurable STDS. That’s a little much, dontchathink?
“But they’re not involved in advocating for affordable housing, or education for young people; they don’t sponsor or run any mentoring programs to help young woemn identify and/or achieve goals. But yet you’re not taking them to task for that.”
I’m not taking Planned Parenthood to task because they are an organization with a specific goal in mind, and I find that specific goal to be valid and helpful to society at large. I respect and believe in their right to exist.
I think the Parents Television Council is bullshit because what they do (which is watch TV and then send out press releases about why *insert tv show here* is inappropriate) solves nothing and helps no one.
Art and Violence (or sex, or drugs, etc.)are not the same things. You cannot judge them the same way.
An organization that tries to make medical care affordable and accessible to the poor and underprivileged is valid. A non-profit that promotes Stop-the-Violence campaigns in the inner-city is very valid.
But an organization that tries to police and have some kind of influence on ART and its availability to the public is bullshit. Art is a reflection of our society, in all of its beauty and ugliness. Condemning art misses the point entirely.
As stated in the article, Parents should be having ongoing conversations with their children about issues like sexual assault, violence, and dating; rather than trying to make the “Man Down” music video go away.
You seem to blow off these television programs as art and then leave the discussion at that.It would be great if u got into a discussion about what, for the lack of a better word, are the limitations of art, if any actually. Also Since when do television corporations attempt to make everything they show on the tube art, rather than that make money?
You seem to blow off these television programs as art and then leave the discussion at that.It would be great if u got into a discussion about what, for the lack of a better word, are the limitations of art, if any actually. Also Since when do television corporations attempt to make everything they show on the tube art, rather than that make money?