In light of the whole arts world supporting Macklemore over his censorship, who in the music industry supported Róisín Murphy?

Perhaps you could point out where I have said she was?

Why is it no longer OK to be apolitical? If you're a popstar, why do you have to have an opinion on a complex and long-standing geopolitical conflict?

It's getting more and more like the struggle sessions of China's cultural revolution when dissidents were forced to denounce themselves.

Yes it’s bizarre and unnecessary.

Yes, and his only 'crime' was to not make pronouncements about a complicated war in another country. Seems like 'speaking out about Gaza' has become compelled speech. Crazy situation.

alcovecupboards · Today 20:14
Roisin Murphy's (former) fans are passionately pro-trans. Contrary to Mumsnet belief - people aren't actually required to continue supporting an artist they find objectionable.

You referred to her former fans being 'pro-trans', and that people aren't obliged 'to continue supporting an artist they find objectionable' -
implying that they find Róisín Murphy objectionable, and because she is not, like them, pro-trans.

Is that not what you meant?
Do you agree that Róisín Murphy is not anti-trans?
On what other basis would her former 'passionately pro-trans' fans find her 'objectionable', according to you?

What were you implying here?

Roisin Murphy's (former) fans are passionately pro-trans. Contrary to Mumsnet belief - people aren't actually required to continue supporting an artist they find objectionable. As she has now discovered.

Yes OP, the double standard bites hard. The bystander behaviour in terms of women and children under attack is visible from domestic violence and child sexual abuse (think all the major child abuse scandals around the globe) right through to speaking up for womens rights. Always, it is the people, usually women, who speak up about safeguarding women and children, who are vilified and cancelled.

Sorry, no time to read all this thread and suspect this point has been made elsewhere.

What happened to Ed Sheeran or rather the show was that the stadium owner decided after having agreed the booking to block it.

And then others took a position on it, some challenging the right of the owner to dictate who is allowed on this stage, and as usual, nothing to do with any thing real, all sorts of people demanded ES take a stand.

What happened to Róisín Murphy was that other musicians, the music industry boycotted her. Tried to negate her.

The Ed Sheeran "drama" is much more about US politics, although some are trying to blame Pink for starting it all. But it was the owner of the stadium, a well known supporter of Israel and pals with Trump.

All those who are now trying to get their 2 minutes of fame are just the consequences of how social media and politics interacts in the US and filters through to the UK.

Very different to Róisín Murphy being ostracised by colleagues etc.. And her future career.

(And let's face it, even if FWR's contributors think women's sex based rights are a number 1 issue, I dont think it has quite the traction in terms of opinion, news coverage, etc, as the situation in the Middle East!0

I've been quite clear.

It means exactly what it says.

Not sure why you’re being so coy about what you mean. It obviously isn’t clear and you lose nothing by explaining it further. I guess this is a step up from insinuations of ‘shady things’ though.

Starmer's back 😄

I disagree.

Exactly this!

Long and windy post deleted 😀but the gist was, politicians would be much better trying to fix things that actually are fixable, like the all too real concerns on this folder, (and which are absolutely doable, if the will is there), rather than seeking easy brownie points by wanging on about I/P, where the ability of any UK govt to effect any major change seems unrealistic.

I don’t understand why everyone is mad at Ed Sheeran. It sounded like he tried to support Macklemore but business is business and there are a lot more people depending on those gigs going ahead. His responses have been a bit spineless but a few weeks ago everyone was saying how smart Dolly Parton was to not be political.

I don’t support Macklemore using someone else’s concert to promote his personal geopolitical views to a captive audience any more than I support Robert Kraft in using his stadiums as ransoms to support his. They are both multi- millionaires trying to virtue signal to their community on a conflict that has been going for over 100years.

The other artists and that radio station are pathetic to make this about free speech. I bet the radio station still plays Michael Jackson.

But Ed Sheeran WASNT apolitical before. He has done concerts for Ukraine, and he endorsed Jeremy Corbyn.

In this case, he chose to work with artists that have been extremely clear on their politics (Macklemore’s views on Palestine are well established)…. He arguably using politically outspoken artists to gain credibility / edge with less risk than speaking out himself (obviously this has backfired spectacularly). He absolutely tried to have his cake and eat it.

And generally, the idea that art should or even could be detatched from the world it’s produced in is just …. Silly.

Your thing about not putting their heads above the parapet seems to assume that people working in the arts world all secretly agree with RM and RK but don’t have the courage to say so.

Have you considered we really just DON’T agree with them? Many of us in the creative industries work alongside brilliant trans colleagues, which is a good preventative for spending your time imagining trans bogeymen, tbh.

The point is, if you are an artist claiming that other artists should be free to speak, you should support that freedom whether you agree with them or not. Thank you though for so clearly confirming that the right to free speech is contingent upon saying something popular.

Other people have done plenty of explaining on this thread re the difference between a single billionaire de-platforming artists, versus an artist becoming less popular with audiences, former fans & other artists 🤷‍♀️

If you behave as Macklemore did and use grotesque costumes more relevant to 100 years ago then you might not get a stage after all (general you).

There is a different between providing political support, and platforming politics at your concert.

Most people are not going to an Ed Sheeran concert to be lectured on a conflict they can't do anything about, by a multi-millionaire musician who has no connection to the conflict. They are going to have a good time and escape from the drama for a bit.

Everyone has political views but most people don't use them to promote themselves as a "special and kind person".

But ES was already platforming politics AT HIS CONCERTS.

He and his team knew that Macklemore would likely speak out at concerts about his well established support for Palestine.

That’s what I mean by ES having his cake and eating it.

Im not even going to engage with your ‘art should only be escapism’ belief because it’s completely ahistorical and shows such a spectacular lack of any critical thinking around art / music etc at all.

And your belief that people only speak out against a genocide to prove they’re a ‘special kind of person’ is so sad. I’m glad I’ve met good people; you don’t seem to have.