Author: has written 5277 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

31 Responses

  1. tata
    tata March 11, 2009 at 10:59 am |

    No, David Vitter abused his wife’s trust with an identical sex worker. Michael Vick abused dogs.

  2. Lance
    Lance March 11, 2009 at 11:02 am |

    I know it’s an online petition that doesn’t mean anything, but why would Rihanna be removed from consideration? Are they seriously equating abuser and abuse victim?

  3. Chris
    Chris March 11, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    Lance, I think its just because they don’t want to draw any attention to the very mention of Rihanna’s name right now. Which is stupid, but I don’t think they’re blaming her for anything.

  4. Black Cat Rescue
    Black Cat Rescue March 11, 2009 at 11:14 am |

    I generally find it problematic when people respond to outcries against animal cruelty with “But there are humans suffering! Why don’t you care about that?!”, so I don’t want to come across as saying that (and I know that’s not at all what Jill is implying). However, it’s hard not to acknowledge how messed up it is that Chris Brown is still being asked to perform at a kids show (which just screams role model to me), when you point out the career consequences and general public disdain that others have faced for lesser (particularly in Michael Phelps’ case) offenses.

  5. shah8
    shah8 March 11, 2009 at 11:20 am |

    People do not want complicated stories that are inevitably involved in injuries to other people instead of animals. In and of itself, the attitude isn’t bad, but lavish concern for animals as opposed to humans is generally a signpost of moral laziness.

    On the other hand, I do not believe Phelps was rightfully pilloried.

  6. Lilith
    Lilith March 11, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    I think maybe they’re considering removing Rihanna also because of the rumors that she and Brown have reconciled. (Perhaps they consider her to be a bad role model because of that, although I think you have to look at it from a different perspective).

    On a personal level I’d love to see Chris Brown excluded from the awards altogether, I would be more disturbed if Nickelodeon/Viacom took it upon themselves to deny the kids their choice.

    That is, if they can refuse Brown’s award or nomination because he was charged (not convicted) of a crime, who is to say that they won’t decide next year that other nominees are “bad role models” because they’re gay or have kids outside of marriage or don’t wear purity rings, heh. It would be a dangerous precedent to set.

    I think it’s perfectly acceptable to ask him not to attend the event and definitely they shouldn’t allow him to perform or present. But if it truly is a Kids Choice award, then it should be the kids choice. Hopefully, the kids will not vote for him.

  7. Personal Failure
    Personal Failure March 11, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    Clearly, Nickolodean is just teaching children the reality of America: abuse dogs and you’re bad. Smoke a little pot and you’re bad. Abortion, bad. Atheism, bad. Spousal abuse, a-okay!

  8. Joan Kelly
    Joan Kelly March 11, 2009 at 11:57 am |

    Yeah, what the fuck with the petition asking for Rihanna’s name to be removed? I don’t actually give a fuck if the petition-writers had some theoretically (evidence?) non-victim-blaming/non-victim-stigmatizing reason for putting her name on there. If we’re going to talk about sending messages and responsibilities thereof, how about the petition writers don’t send the fucking message that Rihanna should be removed from an awards show/nomination process as a direct result of someone else beating the fuck out of her? I repeate, WHAT THE MOTHERFUCK??

  9. FilthyGrandeur
    FilthyGrandeur March 11, 2009 at 11:58 am |

    out of curiosity i had gone on the kids choice website (plus i still watch nick) and was so pissed to see his face still on the voting page. what’s that saying to children? i’m sorry, but his identity as just an artist changed the second he struck her, and i don’t think being included in the awards sends a good message (thought this was obvious, but apparently not.

  10. Davey
    Davey March 11, 2009 at 12:20 pm |

    >On a personal level I’d love to see Chris Brown excluded from the awards altogether, I would be more disturbed if Nickelodeon/Viacom took it upon themselves to deny the kids their choice.

    I’m a supporter of a lot of children’s rights, but I don’t include control of award shows among those rights. And I have a feeling if the kids of America chose to nominate Jenna Jameson for an award that Viacom would find some way to block it.

  11. Jovan1984
    Jovan1984 March 11, 2009 at 12:47 pm |

    I am mad at Nickelodeon for keeping Chris Brown. I am also mad at NBC for keeping Kelly Bensimon on the Real Housewives of New York City. Abusers should have no place on our television screens. If Nick and NBC were wise, they would drop Brown and Bensimon from their respective shows.

    I am pissed off that domestic abusers get a free pass while people like Barry Bonds don’t!

  12. Renee
    Renee March 11, 2009 at 1:02 pm |

    Many of Browns sponsors immediately dropped him when they learned of the savage beating of Rihanna. I cannot believe that it is taking active protest on the part of parents to have this man removed from a ceremony in which he will be held up as a hero to children. By allowing him to remain what are we teaching children but that we approve of violence. I am completely disgusted with Nickolodian. It will probably take some serious threat to their profit to change their minds rather than a server aversion to the gross misconduct and violence conducted by Brown.

  13. Proper Talks » Blog Archive » New Chris Brown and Ri Ri Duet in the Works

    [...] and check out Feministe’s case for why Nickelodeon should remove Chris Brown as a Kid’s Choice Nominee. I agree except [...]

  14. Persia
    Persia March 11, 2009 at 1:38 pm |

    I’m a supporter of a lot of children’s rights, but I don’t include control of award shows among those rights. And I have a feeling if the kids of America chose to nominate Jenna Jameson for an award that Viacom would find some way to block it.

    What you said. The Kids’ Choice awards aren’t a celebration of freedom of speech; they’re a marketing ploy.

  15. Kelsey
    Kelsey March 11, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    According to Yahoo! News Chris Brown just withdrew his name from nomination.

  16. SBMe
    SBMe March 11, 2009 at 2:06 pm |
  17. Renee
    Renee March 11, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    His withdrawal was probably the first sensible decision he has made in quite some time. I do however believe that we should all be cognizant of the fact that Nickelodeon was willing to honor a man that was physically abusive towards a woman.

  18. Ali
    Ali March 11, 2009 at 3:04 pm |

    agreed Renee

  19. Lilith
    Lilith March 11, 2009 at 3:07 pm |

    I wasn’t trying to imply that the Kids’ Choice Awards was some form of democracy and free speech, geez. What I was saying is that I think it’s a bad idea for a network to promote something as being the choice of the viewers and then actually not allowing the viewers to choose.

    And while I definitely didn’t want to see Chris Brown as a nominee, I think it would’ve been a dangerous precedent to set… Who will Nick’ decide is a bad role model next year? Gay people? Non-virgins? Muslims? It is either the choice of the children or it isn’t.

    I think him withdrawing (possibly at the request of Viacom) was a better solution than Nick’ playing judge and jury. Remember that Brown has not been convicted of anything. He should’ve definitely been barred from performing or presenting (and despite comments to the contrary, he was NOT scheduled to perform) and perhaps asked not to attend.

    I’m glad he has withdrawn.

  20. ThickRedGlasses
    ThickRedGlasses March 11, 2009 at 3:42 pm |

    People aren’t going to like what I’m going to say, but I don’t think he should be barred from being nominated or from winning. I don’t think Nickelodeon is promoting intimate partner violence by having Chris Brown nominated, no more than they’re promoting kids watching TV-PG/TV-14 shows by nominating Jason Lee and The Simpsons, and no more than they’re promoting disordered eating and unrealistic beauty standards by nominating America’s Next Top Model, and no more than they’re promoting practicing witchcraft by nominating the Harry Potter book series, and no more than they’re promoting lesbian hook-ups by nominating “I Kissed a Girl.” There are people in this country who would call for all of those nominations to be withdrawn (and it wouldn’t surprise me if there were petitions for those nominations too).

    Let me share a story with you all. I was about six or seven years old when Paul Reubens, aka Pee-Wee Herman, was arrested for exposing himself in public. I saw it all over the news, and I didn’t really get what was happening. I loved Pee-Wee’s Playhouse (still love the movies), and I couldn’t understand why he was being arrested. Exposing himself in a movie theater? What the heck does that mean? In the attempt to protect a “perv” from children, this story was all over the news — that kids watch! Would it have been worse if his show continued to be aired on television for me to watch and have me not know about his crime, or is it worse if the show is cancelled but I learned that someone I was a huge fan of whips it out and learning what whipping it out in public is. I think it’s worse to make public the sordid lives of children’s heroes before they’re old enough to understand what the hell is going on. So I don’t think it’s appropriate to bring Chris Brown’s charges of intimate partner violence into an awards show for kids. Most of the kids watching probably aren’t old enough to understand the Chris Brown/Rihanna thing, and we don’t need the TV telling kids about in a way that they won’t understand.

  21. Alison
    Alison March 11, 2009 at 4:31 pm |

    ThickRedGlasses – I don’t know for sure but I assume the average age of kids who attend or watch the Kids Choice Awards is probably 9 or 10. That is PLENTY old enough to understand what abuse is and that it’s bad. We’re not talking about toddlers here, we’re talking about tweens, mostly – and they should absolutely be aware of domestic abuse and how wrong it is. NOT talking about this sort of thing to kids is part of our whole big ugly problem. And kids should understand that when you do something bad – like, beat up your girlfriend – there are consequences – like, you don’t get a stupid award for your stupid song.

  22. Lilith
    Lilith March 11, 2009 at 6:40 pm |

    Re: Alison – I agree. I think that children need to be taught about what Chris Brown did and why it’s wrong. By Their Parents. Not by Nickelodeon. My child knows what happened and with that knowledge would not have voted for him. I think we have to give our kids some credit to understand and do the right thing, if we give them that chance. Him being nominated doesn’t promote violence, it simply shows that the kids liked him before they knew of his actions (i.e., before it became news). Educate your kids on why he doesn’t deserve an award and hopefully they would not vote for him to receive one. I don’t allow TV to tell my child who her role models are or aren’t, I give her the knowledge and information to make those decisions herself.

    Re: Jill – Beating someone up is a crime, but Chris Brown has not yet been convicted. (And in some parts of the world being gay or practicing witchcraft or some of the other things TRG mentioned are illegal, but I digress). I’m really glad that he’s withdrawn from the awards and I think that Nick’ probably pressured him to do so, but I think it would have been inappropriate for Nick’ to ignore the actual nomination votes based on something that is still technically alleged.

    And damn you for making me defend Chris Brown! I don’t want to do that! He sucks! lol… I’m just trying to look at this from a non-emotional standpoint. I want my daughter to learn that if you do something wrong, there are consequences… but I want those consequences to come from the correct avenues. (That is, Brown should go to jail if he’s guilty. It is not Nickelodeon’s place to play judge and jury).

  23. ThickRedGlasses
    ThickRedGlasses March 11, 2009 at 9:15 pm |

    I don’t know for sure but I assume the average age of kids who attend or watch the Kids Choice Awards is probably 9 or 10. That is PLENTY old enough to understand what abuse is and that it’s bad. We’re not talking about toddlers here, we’re talking about tweens, mostly – and they should absolutely be aware of domestic abuse and how wrong it is. NOT talking about this sort of thing to kids is part of our whole big ugly problem. And kids should understand that when you do something bad – like, beat up your girlfriend – there are consequences – like, you don’t get a stupid award for your stupid song.

    I don’t disagree. But you’re basing this opinion on something that might not even be true. Is the average kid who watches the Kids’ Choice Awards 9 or 10? Is the average 9 or 10 year old enough to learn about domestic violence through the media? I don’t know. I would say no. Parents should talk to their children about this in an age-appropriate way if they think their kids can handle it. My point is that not all kids might be ready, and forcing kids to hear about it by kicking Chris Brown off an awards show is probably not the best way to go.

  24. nena morsden
    nena morsden March 14, 2009 at 10:39 am |

    If we are going to remove chris brown from the show, then we need remove Hannah Montana for racial pics to her friends about asians americans . what kind of role is she to little girls.

  25. confused
    confused March 14, 2009 at 11:37 pm |

    I’m confused. Why are any of those song choices appropriate for children?
    Lyrics like…Now put your hands up
    Up in the club(club)
    Just broke up(up)
    Doing my own little thing
    You decided to dip (dip)
    And now you wanna trip (trip)
    Cuz another brother noticed me
    I’m up on him (him), he up on me (me)
    ….or…
    Baby are you ready cause its getting close
    Don’t you feel the passion ready to explode
    What goes on between us no one has to know
    This is a private show (oh)
    Do you know what you started
    I just came here to party
    But now we’re rockin’ on the dance floor
    Acting naughty
    Your hands around my waist
    Are any of them really appropriate??

  26. Dead Rabbit
    Dead Rabbit March 29, 2009 at 11:24 am |

    Did any of you actually watch the KCA?

  27. Corey
    Corey March 31, 2009 at 12:32 am |

    I did….and while I glad Chris didn’t perform…..it was a whole nuther thing to have the freakin pussycat dolls performing for these children. ugh……what is this world coming to.

  28. Anna Thomas
    Anna Thomas July 26, 2009 at 8:43 pm |

    It appears Nickelodeon has very little, if any, integrity. I mean, really, the Pussycat Dolls???? On a kids show??? The over sexualization of young children in this country is outrageous…adult sexuality pushed on them from most everywhere….and, yes, i am a sex loving liberal…not a prude!!! i am also a psychotherapist who works with kids and we are seeing a trend in kids appearing to be sexually abused, yet with no sexual abuse history…beyond being inundated with adult sexuality everywhere they look…………..absurd….

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.