To comment in the AC/DC forum [ Sign In | Register ]

Custom Search

ACDCfans.net

This forum is for fans of rock music, rock bands and rock concerts - and in particular AC/DC's brand of high-voltage rock 'n' roll music. ACDCfans.net brings you the latest AC/DC news and gives rock music fans and musicians a chance to meet others like them around the world.

To comment in the forum, you need to register for an account. Sign in to your account below or apply for membership.
















  1.  
    Posted By: CantEvenFeedMyCatInteresting point. The Mutt albums with AC/DC sound nothing like the Mutt albums with Def Leppard. I wonder how much of that was the band resisting/caving in or Mutt learning more about the studio in later years?


    To be fair, there's a bit of AC/DC on the 1st Mutt produced Leppard Album. Listen to Let it Go and especially the title track. And even on Pyromania, there were some traces of AC/DC (the main riff and vocals on Rock 'til You Drop and the vocals on Stagefright come to mind). However by Hysteria, all traces of AC/DC had been sadly removed. I say sadly, because the AC/DC influence was one of the things I enjoyed the most about Def Leppard. They sounded like a more sensitive AC/DC! haha
    Not as good as the real thing, but still still superior to most of the hair metal bands from that era.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: Inferno
    • May 10th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: mutt_langes_perm
    Posted By: CantEvenFeedMyCatInteresting point. The Mutt albums with AC/DC sound nothing like the Mutt albums with Def Leppard. I wonder how much of that was the band resisting/caving in or Mutt learning more about the studio in later years?


    To be fair, there's a bit of AC/DC on the 1st Mutt produced Leppard Album. Listen to Let it Go and especially the title track. And even on Pyromania, there were some traces of AC/DC (the main riff and vocals on Rock 'til You Drop and the vocals on Stagefright come to mind). However by Hysteria, all traces of AC/DC had been sadly removed. I say sadly, because the AC/DC influence was one of the things I enjoyed the most about Def Leppard. They sounded like a more sensitive AC/DC! haha
    Not as good as the real thing, but still still superior to most of the hair metal bands from that era.


    This is true. High N Dry is an ass kicker of a record and I think I liked it so much because it had that AC/DC style and energy. I also remember back then reading that Mutt Lange had moved on from AC/DC. There was talk of Def Leppard being the next AC/DC and I was thinking "uh oh". I took it personally. I liked Def Leppard, but didn't want anyone messing with, or being bigger than "my" band.

    Mutt made Def Leppard superstars, but also ruined them too. AC/DC was just as good for Mutt as he was for them.
  2.  
    Of course no combination of Mutt and any random joe's will equal what AC/DC and Mutt did, however like you said, Def Leppard had yet to make their mark and were hungry to succeed no matter what, and were much more willing to listen to what ever Mutt suggested than the boys.

    Mutt likely also had a sense of confidence when working with Def Leppard as well,due to the gained notches of Highway and Back In Black on his belt.

    Who are they to argue with Mutt Lange at that point in time, ya know? Where as AC/DC up until Highway while not megastars, had quite the following and their core sound blueprint laid down more or less for what was to come, willing to polish up if needed to get that radio hit but certainly not going to break the mold for Mutt or anyone, no keyboards,no strings,synths,electronic drum pads or anything crazy.


    That first Def Leppard record with him is full of AC/DC influence,I am sure he and they wanted to try and follow what worked. With each proceeding record they drifted from his blue print with AC/DC finding their own sound in time.

    That being said Def Leppard are great up to and including Adrenalize for me.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: Inferno
    • May 11th 2019
     
    Go Zone to Mutt to Def Leppard. Nice!
  3.  
    Was always one of my fave songs on that record. Don't get the hate for the chorus.

    Not a classic song but a very good one to me. You telling me ⅔ of the nonsense on Black Ice is better than this? Or 9/10 of Rock Or Shite?
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: Thankass
    • May 11th 2019
     
    Def Leppard was Mutt's toy. He co-wrote every song on Pyromania and Hysteria. He took years to write and record them. A thing that FTATR was also suffering from (recording perfection fetish by Mutt). Malcolm probably felt that they went a on a road he didn't want ac/dc to go on and booted Mutt. A brave thing to do after gaining so much commercial succes with him.

    I still would have liked a Mutt produced BUYV with a healthy partnership; AC/DC bring the songs, Mutt brings the sound. Mutt would have suggested to skip Go Zone in favor of Borrowed Time.
  4.  
    I often wonder what a fabled 4th mid 80's Mutt record would have been.

    I still feel it would have been a 180 of FTATR, not Flick for sure, but I think they would have still tried to go a different direction with Mutt had he been kept on one more record.

    None the less... Go Zone is awesome.










    (He knows Phil Rudd you know?).......
  5.  
    Agreed with balltoucher on sof agree with him again another SKIP for me
  6.  
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo? I await your surely rational explanation...
    • AC/DC rock music: Rocco
    • May 14th 2019
     
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo? I await your surely rational explanation...


    No, that's not what he was saying. And if you had basic reading comprehension skills you would have understood that.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: BallToucher
    • May 14th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: nitroangus23I often wonder what a fabled 4th mid 80's Mutt record would have been.


    Who doesn´t?

    I still feel VIDEO was the perfect album to have Mutt back, after the Youngs had had plenty of time to play around with Flick and Fly.

    Another great time slot was Ballbreaker. Sadly that ship has sailed and will forever remain in the good ol' 'What if' threads.

    Producers choice always respond to a certain mood and what state of mind the band is at. Also, the producer should be brought in depending of what early demos sound like. VIDEO just screams Mutt, Stiff Upper Lip was perfect for George, and it shows. That was a good choice.

    BoB was hired because...who fucking knows. And twice!
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: DrBelford
    • May 14th 2019
     
    Posted By: BallToucherProducers choice always respond to a certain mood and what state of mind the band is at. Also, the producer should be brought in depending of what early demos sound like. VIDEO just screams Mutt, Stiff Upper Lip was perfect for George, and it shows. That was a good choice.

    BoB was hired because...who fucking knows. And twice!


    I guess that "availability" would also be part of the equation, wouldn't it?
  7.  
    Posted By: BallToucher
    BoB was hired because...who fucking knows. And twice!


    Because things with Mutt didn't work out, according to Brian in an interview. They wanted to get Mutt for what was to be Black Ice and Brian said " the schedules just didn't line up".

    In reality I think if they both really wanted to work together again,I am pretty sure they would have made it happen.

    BOB was the Mutt place holder. He's like Mutt without the ideas and innovation..."Hollow Lange" if you will.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: Thankass
    • May 14th 2019
     
    Posted By: BallToucher
    Posted By: nitroangus23I often wonder what a fabled 4th mid 80's Mutt record would have been.


    Who doesn´t?

    I still feel VIDEO was the perfect album to have Mutt back, after the Youngs had had plenty of time to play around with Flick and Fly.

    Another great time slot was Ballbreaker. Sadly that ship has sailed and will forever remain in the good ol' 'What if' threads.

    Producers choice always respond to a certain mood and what state of mind the band is at. Also, the producer should be brought in depending of what early demos sound like. VIDEO just screams Mutt, Stiff Upper Lip was perfect for George, and it shows. That was a good choice.

    BoB was hired because...who fucking knows. And twice!
    BoB was hired to give them more commercial succes imo. This by bringing back the bigger choruses and catchyness.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: DrBelford
    • May 14th 2019
     
    Posted By: ThankassBoB was hired to give them more commercial succes imo. This by bringing back the bigger choruses and catchyness.


    Yes, this seems very likely to be the reason. He might be a "place holder" as nitroangus suggested, but I think a solid one at that.
  8.  
    Getting back on track to the topic of this thread. Go Zone was certainly one of the better songs on the Blow Up Your Video album.
  9.  
    Posted By: Rocco
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo? I await your surely rational explanation...


    No, that's not what he was saying. And if you had basic reading comprehension skills you would have understood that.


    Pretty arrogant response for someone who should take their own advice. MeToo is about rape and sexual harassment. Saying Brian would get in trouble with that movement for those lyrics is either saying Brian was a rapist or he's trying to minimize the legitimacy of MeToo victims by acting like it's just about vaguely sexual lyrics. Explain your understanding of it, smartass.
    • AC/DC rock music: Rocco
    • May 15th 2019
     
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rocco
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo? I await your surely rational explanation...


    No, that's not what he was saying. And if you had basic reading comprehension skills you would have understood that.


    Pretty arrogant response for someone who should take their own advice. MeToo is about rape and sexual harassment. Saying Brian would get in trouble with that movement for those lyrics is either saying Brian was a rapist or he's trying to minimize the legitimacy of MeToo victims by acting like it's just about vaguely sexual lyrics. Explain your understanding of it, smartass.


    First of all you can stuff that "smartass" right where it hurts. You insinuated that Rajd07 called Brian a rapist when he never ever did that. I hope the mods/admins take care of you.
  10.  
    Well that excallated quickly...
  11.  
    Posted By: Rocco
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rocco
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo? I await your surely rational explanation...


    No, that's not what he was saying. And if you had basic reading comprehension skills you would have understood that.


    Pretty arrogant response for someone who should take their own advice. MeToo is about rape and sexual harassment. Saying Brian would get in trouble with that movement for those lyrics is either saying Brian was a rapist or he's trying to minimize the legitimacy of MeToo victims by acting like it's just about vaguely sexual lyrics. Explain your understanding of it, smartass.


    First of all you can stuff that "smartass" right where it hurts. You insinuated that Rajd07 called Brian a rapist when he never ever did that. I hope the mods/admins take care of you.


    As I suspected, you cannot back up your arrogance with logic. That is exactly what he did and I explained it for you quite clearly. If calling somebody out for either calling the subject of the forum a rapist or de-legitimizing victims is against the forum rules, I would be more than glad to leave such a place. Run along, now.
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 15th 2019
     
    What Rajd07 meant was that some styles of lyrics you could get away with 20 or 30 years ago, you might think twice about now. Doesn't mean they had any ill intent; in AC/DC's case, more just juvenile mischief. Those lyrics to Snake Eye - it's not meant literally, no-one's getting attacked - but it's perception, and how people can use them as a stick to fight with, whether virtue-signalling, or something more honest, if misguided.

    You wouldn't get Motorhead's Jailbait these days, and most bands wouldn't write Cover You In Oil either. But at least in the latter's case, it was just harmless fun from not very good lyricists.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: Briany
    • May 15th 2019
     
    Comparative studies in sexual morality - AC/DC edition.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: DrBelford
    • May 15th 2019
     
    ^Love this guy XD
  12.  
    Posted By: BrianyComparative studies in sexual morality - AC/DC edition.


    Do you think this class will further my career in the STEM field?
  13.  
    Posted By: 900What Rajd07 meant was that some styles of lyrics you could get away with 20 or 30 years ago, you might think twice about now. Doesn't mean they had any ill intent; in AC/DC's case, more just juvenile mischief. Those lyrics to Snake Eye - it's not meant literally, no-one's getting attacked - but it's perception, and how people can use them as a stick to fight with, whether virtue-signalling, or something more honest, if misguided.

    You wouldn't get Motorhead's Jailbait these days, and most bands wouldn't write Cover You In Oil either. But at least in the latter's case, it was just harmless fun from not very good lyricists.


    "Virtue signaling" is not a thing, for starters. It's a meaningless buzzword used to turn criticism back on the person criticizing. A cheap rhetorical diversion.

    There are tons of sexually suggestive songs today. Like 90% of music has been about sex since the dawn of time. Sexual does not equal sexist, and nobody is claiming it does. No, not even the "radical feminists" boogeyman.

    As far as Jailbait, yeah that song would be a scandal and rightfully so. The difference between that and Cover You in Oil is like the difference between a kitten and a Mack truck.

    That was exactly my point that there is nothing abusive about AC/DC's lyrics, even the most sexual ones. So why would he bring up MeToo at all unless he was saying their lyrics were abusive or he was de-legitimizing MeToo victims?
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 16th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    "Virtue signaling" is not a thing, for starters.


    It absolutely does exist. A quick view of social media confirms that. Whether or not people with good intentions are wrongly accused of it at times is a different matter.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotAs far as Jailbait, yeah that song would be a scandal and rightfully so. The difference between that and Cover You in Oil is like the difference between a kitten and a Mack truck.


    I agree, which is why I said it was meant as harmless fun. The point though, is that if you write that song in the current era, the perception will be somewhat different to 1995.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotSo why would he bring up MeToo at all unless he was saying their lyrics were abusive or he was de-legitimizing MeToo victims


    See previous comment. He's (I think) not saying the song was dodgy, but that it might be perceived as such now.
  14.  
    Posted By: 900
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    "Virtue signaling" is not a thing, for starters.


    It absolutely does exist. A quick view of social media confirms that. Whether or not people with good intentions are wrongly accused of it at times is a different matter.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotAs far as Jailbait, yeah that song would be a scandal and rightfully so. The difference between that and Cover You in Oil is like the difference between a kitten and a Mack truck.


    I agree, which is why I said it was meant as harmless fun. The point though, is that if you write that song in the current era, the perception will be somewhat different to 1995.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotSo why would he bring up MeToo at all unless he was saying their lyrics were abusive or he was de-legitimizing MeToo victims


    See previous comment. He's (I think) not saying the song was dodgy, but that it might be perceived as such now.


    Oh, so you know the intentions of everyone on social media in order to conclusively prove some ulterior motive you believe they harbor? You realize how ridiculous that is, right?

    No, that song would not be perceived any different today. Rock or Bust came out in 2015 with songs called "Emission Control" and "Miss Adventure". You are projecting your assumptions onto an amorphous, generalized boogeyman called "PC Culture".

    Yes, and if an innocuous song were perceived as offensive today by the MeToo movement (which is not at all what the movement is about anyway), it would de-legitimize them by making them look stupid. He is suggesting that they would, which means that he believes they are stupid and illegitimate enough to make that mistake. Please read what I am saying carefully because the nuance seems to be getting lost.
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 22nd 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotOh, so you know the intentions of everyone on social media in order to conclusively prove some ulterior motive you believe they harbor? You realize how ridiculous that is, right?


    (Comment edited, too aggressive. Still a cretin though, sorry.)

    You're a moron, I didn't say that, and you've totally misrepresented everything to construct your own case, which ironically, features plenty of virtue signalling.
  15.  
    Posted By: 900
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotOh, so you know the intentions of everyone on social media in order to conclusively prove some ulterior motive you believe they harbor? You realize how ridiculous that is, right?


    (Comment edited, too aggressive. Still a cretin though, sorry.)

    You're a moron, I didn't say that, and you've totally misrepresented everything to construct your own case, which ironically, features plenty of virtue signalling.


    Nothing aggressive about calling somebody a cretin, nope...

    I responded to exactly what you said, word for word. If I misrepresented you, explain how. It sounds like you just haven't thought through your own points enough to understand my responses. For example, your first comment claiming that people all over social media are "virtue signaling" would require you to know their true intentions, which you simply do not. You are making assumptions and projections of the motives of people you've never even met.

    Ironically, just using the term "virtue signaling" signals your anti-political correctness virtues.
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 26th 2019
     
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotIt sounds like you just haven't thought through your own points enough to understand my responses.


    No, I understand your comments, I just don't agree with you. Probably we're not going to align on this.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotyour first comment claiming that people all over social media are "virtue signaling" would require you to know their true intentions, which you simply do not.


    I've been on Twitter for a long time and it's common to see people jumping on bandwagons and making self-indulgent proclamations to big themselves up. Honestly, it doesn't take a psychology professor to see it. And I'm not knocking the movements they claim to support; I just think it damages them and creates division when comments are made not from real belief or values, but to get an ego-boost, attract attention or take a swipe at something or someone. For example, people who masquerade as feminists when their main goal is simply to attack men - that's divisive, not helpful to feminism.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotYou are making assumptions and projections of the motives of people you've never even met.


    That's exactly what you're doing in your next bit though...

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotjust using the term "virtue signaling"signals your anti-political correctness virtues.


    That's a strange one. You don't know me, my political leanings, the charities I support, what I do in my spare time. I don't generalise political correctness; I agree with some of it, but not all of it, that is all.

    I'll explain my view again.. Something like Cover You In Oil was written innocently, but times have moved on further since 1995. You're right that a similar song could get written and released now, but I'd think it would be more likely the record company would block it and say the lyrics could be a problem if misconstrued (or, if not misconstrued, deliberately misinterpreted to create an issue). It might go totally under the radar, but I can imagine a social media storm if someone with tens of thousands of followers decided to highlight it on his / her Twitter feed, for example. That's how it starts. Whether or not some people then correlate it with the wrong hashtag or movement, is a different issue, and yes, that happens too.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo?


    This dialogue resulted from you saying that. To me it seems an over-the-top and unfair thing to say to someone on this forum who's simply stating that perhaps such lyrics were less likely to cause an issue back then than they might do now? If you stand by it, fair enough, at least you stick to your point.
    • AC/DC rock music: Rocco
    • May 26th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: 900
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo?


    This dialogue resulted from you saying that. To me it seems an over-the-top and unfair thing to say to someone on this forum who's simply stating that perhaps such lyrics were less likely to cause an issue back then than they might do now? If you stand by it, fair enough, at least you stick to your point.


    If I was a mod or an admin I would have banned him for this. He is insinuating that Rajd07 called Brian a rapist (a thing Rajd07 obviously never did). To me this kind of behavior is devious, malicious, vicious and way below the moral and intellectual minimum standards of this forum.
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 26th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: RoccoIf I was a mod or an admin I would have banned him for this. He is insinuating that Rajd07 called Brian a rapist (a thing he obviously never did). To me this kind of behavior is devious, malicious, vicious and way below the moral and intellectual minimum standards of this forum.


    I did find it a very strange and abrasive accusation, as there's nothing controversial about the person who posted it. The comment itself is quite innocuous.
  16.  
    Posted By: 900
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotIt sounds like you just haven't thought through your own points enough to understand my responses.


    No, I understand your comments, I just don't agree with you. Probably we're not going to align on this.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotyour first comment claiming that people all over social media are "virtue signaling" would require you to know their true intentions, which you simply do not.


    I've been on Twitter for a long time and it's common to see people jumping on bandwagons and making self-indulgent proclamations to big themselves up. Honestly, it doesn't take a psychology professor to see it. And I'm not knocking the movements they claim to support; I just think it damages them and creates division when comments are made not from real belief or values, but to get an ego-boost, attract attention or take a swipe at something or someone. For example, people who masquerade as feminists when their main goal is simply to attack men - that's divisive, not helpful to feminism.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotYou are making assumptions and projections of the motives of people you've never even met.


    That's exactly what you're doing in your next bit though...

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALotjust using the term "virtue signaling"signals your anti-political correctness virtues.


    That's a strange one. You don't know me, my political leanings, the charities I support, what I do in my spare time. I don't generalise political correctness; I agree with some of it, but not all of it, that is all.

    I'll explain my view again.. Something like Cover You In Oil was written innocently, but times have moved on further since 1995. You're right that a similar song could get written and released now, but I'd think it would be more likely the record company would block it and say the lyrics could be a problem if misconstrued (or, if not misconstrued, deliberately misinterpreted to create an issue). It might go totally under the radar, but I can imagine a social media storm if someone with tens of thousands of followers decided to highlight it on his / her Twitter feed, for example. That's how it starts. Whether or not some people then correlate it with the wrong hashtag or movement, is a different issue, and yes, that happens too.


    The problem with believing what you read on Twitter is that it's not the real world, lots of trolls go on there posing as feminist or whatever in order to make them look bad. They've been caught in the act many times, even with coordinated group efforts.

    Yes, I assumed the purpose of Rajd's comment at first, but neither of the two ways you can interpret that are good.

    You are a rare person then, because "virtue signaling" is an alt-right buzzword just like "white knight, cuck, incel, soyboy" and on and on. It's a cheap DARVO abuser tactic to flip the script on somebody calling you out; if you can't defend your words, paint the person calling you out as disingenuous.

    But there is nothing abusive about Cover You in Oil. As I said before, tons of sexual songs come out every day in 2019 without controversy, including the whole last album Rock or Bust. Cover You is no more sexual or offensive than Miss Adventure or Emission Control. This is what I was talking about, the narrative about "PC culture gone out of control" has people imagining backlash that doesn't exist.

    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo?


    This dialogue resulted from you saying that. To me it seems an over-the-top and unfair thing to say to someone on this forum who's simply stating that perhaps such lyrics were less likely to cause an issue back then than they might do now? If you stand by it, fair enough, at least you stick to your point.


    Do you not see how you are bending over backward and completely ignoring the specific mention of MeToo to interpret him in the most charitable way imaginable though? Yes, I interpreted him in the less charitable way because the most obvious interpretation was that he was belittling MeToo by suggesting they are just a bunch of overreacters who would freak out over Go Zone and not a serious movement about sexual assault and rape. Maybe some people on Twitter go too far but that has nothing to do with MeToo.

    I was deliberately giving him the same uncharitable read he was giving MeToo, hopefully to make him reflect on that.

    In any case, I'm glad we could bring this back down to a more civil place.
  17.  
    Posted By: Rocco
    Posted By: 900
    Posted By: DoinNothingMeansALot
    Posted By: Rajd07Those were the pre-Me-Too days..


    Are you suggesting Brian is a rapist? What the fuck does this have to do with MeToo?


    This dialogue resulted from you saying that. To me it seems an over-the-top and unfair thing to say to someone on this forum who's simply stating that perhaps such lyrics were less likely to cause an issue back then than they might do now? If you stand by it, fair enough, at least you stick to your point.


    If I was a mod or an admin I would have banned him for this. He is insinuating that Rajd07 called Brian a rapist (a thing Rajd07 obviously never did). To me this kind of behavior is devious, malicious, vicious and way below the moral and intellectual minimum standards of this forum.


    Says the guy who openly mocks people. Hold your own standards and maybe people will take you seriously.
    •  
      AC/DC rock music: DrBelford
    • May 26th 2019 edited
     
    Wasn't this thread originally about a song called "Go Zone" XD

    BTW the discussion about supposedly "sexist" or "too sexist" lyrics by AC/DC goes way, way back. Nothing really new about that. It's rather tiring.
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 26th 2019
     
    @DoinNothingMeansALot

    You keep mentioning Emission Control, but I don't see it as a good comparison. Many of of us on here have noted that Cover You In Oil sounds kind of creepy (not deliberately so, of course).

    As for Twitter, trolls exist, sure, but I wasn't referring to trolls. I was referring to bitter, misguided but genuine Twitter users. As for virtue signalling, you're generalising its usage, but if you dislike the term, you knew what I meant by it anyway.

    I simply don't agree with your assessment of the guy's comment. It seems a bit late to be backtracking on your Brian-rapist comment now? You made the comment and have stuck by it? So don't back-track, instead stick with it, or apologise? (suggestion, not an instruction).

    Neither of us know for sure what he meant, but you keep trying to build up this big story based on your assumptions of what he meant? If you think he misused the term "Me Too", why didn't you quiz him on that rather than make the Brian-rapist accusation?

    Perhaps he did misuse "Me Too" and was referring to the change in the landscape generally, around women and their mistreatment? In which case, again, the Brian-rapist thing seems a hell of a thing to say? Essentially, you're either saying he thinks Brian's a rapist (absurd), or you're saying he's belittling the Me Too movement or making light of it...all on the strength of "Those were the pre-Me-Too days.." !? Either way, it's quite an assumption and quite an attack on someone character.

    If it makes you feel better, I think you make your points very well. But to me they're misguided and not in context due to your building of a story out of one little line. And further, I imagine 99% on here support Me Too, so I don't see a big problem here.
  18.  
    Posted By: 900@DoinNothingMeansALot

    You keep mentioning Emission Control, but I don't see it as a good comparison. Many of of us on here have noted that Cover You In Oil sounds kind of creepy (not deliberately so, of course).

    As for Twitter, trolls exist, sure, but I wasn't referring to trolls. I was referring to bitter, misguided but genuine Twitter users. As for virtue signalling, you're generalising its usage, but if you dislike the term, you knew what I meant by it anyway.

    I simply don't agree with your assessment of the guy's comment. It seems a bit late to be backtracking on your Brian-rapist comment now? You made the comment and have stuck by it? So don't back-track, instead stick with it, or apologise? (suggestion, not an instruction).

    Neither of us know for sure what he meant, but you keep trying to build up this big story based on your assumptions of what he meant? If you think he misused the term "Me Too", why didn't you quiz him on that rather than make the Brian-rapist accusation?

    Perhaps he did misuse "Me Too" and was referring to the change in the landscape generally, around women and their mistreatment? In which case, again, the Brian-rapist thing seems a hell of a thing to say? Essentially, you're either saying he thinks Brian's a rapist (absurd), or you're saying he's belittling the Me Too movement or making light of it...all on the strength of "Those were the pre-Me-Too days.." !? Either way, it's quite an assumption and quite an attack on someone character.

    If it makes you feel better, I think you make your points very well. But to me they're misguided and not in context due to your building of a story out of one little line. And further, I imagine 99% on here support Me Too, so I don't see a big problem here.


    What parts of CYIO come off as creepy? Other than referring to her as a "young girl" which could be anything under Brian's age of 47 at the time, I'm not seeing it. And not any different from the line "yeah sweet child" in Sweet Candy, released in 2015 with no controversy.

    My point was that a lot of the time, the people who you think are genuine are actually trolls. That's the whole point, to trick people into thinking they're radical examples of whatever ideology the troll actually hates. I know what you meant by the term, I'm saying it fails as a concept because it only works on assumptions of peoples' true motives. It also reeks of excusing one's own lack of virtue by suggesting that others are only doing it for attention. In any case, it does nothing to further genuine debate, it's just a label to slander people with.

    As I said, I was giving him the same assumption of malice or bad faith that he was giving MeToo supporters and victims. I'm not backtracking, I'm explaining why I said it. As far as misusing the term, well, one wouldn't do that unless they thought of it as interchangeable with whatever broader "political correctness" movement they despise. So maybe that can be a third interpretation, where he simply has lumped MeToo in with whatever "political correctness" boogeyman he believes in... but that is still delegitimizing the movement by equating it with something he considers illegitimate. So not really much better.

    Yes, it is every bit the attack on his character as he was attacking the character of "MeToo" supporters and victims. Again, that was the point, by treating him the way he was treating others, it was supposed to be a wake up call.

    Is there another way to interpret "those were pre-MeToo days" beyond the three we've gone over? I mean, we can at least agree that he's commenting on the sexual nature of the lyrics and whether that would be controversial today. But what can that comment be except suggesting that it would be a controversy today because "MeToo/PC police/whatever other scapegoat" are a bunch of illegitimate reactionaries who would call squirrels sexist? And why am I supposed to dig to figure out his own personal definition of MeToo that differs from the one understood by literally everyone else in order to most charitably interpret his dismissal of other peoples' concerns? Sorry but I just don't feel charitable to people who scapegoat and generalize with anti-"political correctness" nonsense. I have to deal with enough of that with my right wing brother, thank you very much.

    I'd like to believe you that 99% here support MeToo, and I'm sure many would proclaim to, but I have also met many an AC/DC fan who is actively against such progress. I wish it weren't true, but hell, many fans weren't even open minded enough to give Axl a chance as singer!
    • AC/DC rock music: 900
    • May 27th 2019 edited
     
    CYIO - the first verse is what I find creepy, and I'm not the only one who's said it. Sweet Candy, well actually I loathe the line you quote, and indeed the whole lyrical theme, even though a good friend of mine is a pole-dancer. I'm not sure you can judge the point on whether it did or didn't cause an issue though, because it depends on whether someone with a lot of followers decides to make an example of it. I don't find Sweet Candy as bothersome as CYIO though.

    Twitter trolls - if it's someone you know, or whom is generally known, their views known etc., you can differentiate between those and trolls. Yes, some people fool the audience, we've been over that. Where I live (NW London) there's broad use of Twitter and very much so for social and political debate. And I've seen the term you dislike used by all sides. And again (we've been over this) sometimes unfairly or with ill-intention, but other times with validity. If you have evidence its use lies more with right-wingers, fair enough, probably true.

    Well, you've stuck to your guns with your critique of the poster's character and your interpretation of his comment. I find it harsh and can only repeat my previous thought, which is just my instinctive guess; I don't think he meant any harm to movements supporting women. I might be wrong, but that's how I saw it, just a throwaway comment alluding to dodgy lyrics being more prominent back then, as times have moved on.
    • AC/DC rock music: Rajd07
    • May 27th 2019 edited
     
    Posted By: 900What Rajd07 meant was that some styles of lyrics you could get away with 20 or 30 years ago, you might think twice about now. Doesn't mean they had any ill intent; in AC/DC's case, more just juvenile mischief. Those lyrics to Snake Eye - it's not meant literally, no-one's getting attacked


    Thanks for clarifying that 900 (and Rocco). I'm certainly not calling Brian anything like that (insinuations earlier in this thread). Or attacking Me Too supporters or victims (!?). Clearly a misinterpretation by mr Doinnothin.
  19.  
    Alright, think this one has been driven into the ground enough.

    Thread closed, you all can carry on in whispers if you want to continue this conversation.

    Go Zone rules....












    (and he knows Phil Rudd.)