Rap Music Is Appropriate for Children and Teens

My sincerest apologies for missing the last round. Fortunately, there is another round so my opponent will be to respond to my counter-arguments here. For clarity, I'm going to respond to every single point my opponent made and order them numerically. I'll begin with Round 3... 1. Con accuses me of re-wording her statements to change their meaning. She says that by paraphrasing what she said (I worded it as "You can't give me a song that curses as much as a rap song," but she said "Give me a song, from a different genre, that uses a word like that as many times as that song") that I am being aggressive, less specific, and denying the fact that "Pro can give me evidence of a song, from a different genre, that uses a word like that as many times as that song." This accusation is ridiculous. I was merely paraphrasing what she said which is obvious. She clarifies, "I said to give me one that has as much profanity as THAT ONE song, not simply ANY rap song." And that's exactly what I did. I provided an electronic song, ska song and punk song that has as much profanity as THAT song. She said it had to curse more than 49 times. I provided a song from another genre that cursed 120 times. Assuming profanity in music was a big deal (and I've argued that it's not), this challenge has more than been met. Furthermore, psychological studies have proven that heavy metal music makes people aggressive and violent [1]. So again, it's wrong to single out rap music and say it has the potential for violence while ignoring the impact other genres can have as well. 2. Next, Con says I'm being hypocritical because I criticized her for using Yahoo Answers when I cited a source (Answer Bag) that works the same way. However, I cited Answer Bag as my source for where I learned about how many swear words a song has. Can con disprove that argument? No. Meanwhile, Con never presented an argument for me to refute. Her exact words were "The following link will thoroughly explain my point." As I said, myself nor the audience are responsible for going to other websites to read Con's point. She can cite that source as inspiration for her point or where she got her evidence, but she cannot refer us to read arguments on other sites. If that were the case then every debate could be argued just by spamming links. There was no hypocrisy on my end. 3. I said that Con ignored my conclusion about the dangers of censorship, and only singled out the negatives of rap music in particular. In response, Con says that it doesn't matter if there are clean versions of songs because the originals still exist. First, you'll notice that this has nothing whatsoever do do with the dangers of censorship, so it seems Con has still not answered my point. Second, the fact that clean versions exist make it possible to enjoy rap music without the profanity or negative lyrics that Con says ruin the song. Moreover, Con asks me to cite positive effects that cap music can have on teens. This is borderline abusive (a huge waste of my character space) because I already provided examples in previous rounds of some positive which Con has simply ignored. To go more into detail, Murray Forman, professor of media studies at Northeastern University notes potential positive impacts of rap music, such as being "grafted onto some of the new power politics in the early 21st century." It allows people to express themselves; it's art and poetry. Forman said rap helps young artists get out of economic depression who in turn provide a lot of opportunities for their friends and loved ones. Rap also allows for young blacks to articulate a certain cultural perspective, and help others understand what is going on in the minds of young black people in the urban environment [2]. Rap lyrics can also be used to teach and reach people. Afrikabambata, Grandmaster Flash, Common, Nas and Mos-Def are just a few whose lyrical content promotes pride and social consciousness. In September of 2009, Jay-Z headlined a concert to benefit the families of those lost in 9/11. Rap artists, through the performances of their music, can do a lot of good [3]. 4. Con writes, "Yes, some priests may be child molesters, but that does not give you the right to accuse all of them." Right here Con defeats her own argument. Yes, some rappers might be misogynistic drug users, but that does not give you the right to accuse all of them. Some like those I have mentioned specifically speak out against a negative lifestyle. 5. Con is apparently baffled by my contradicting statements. The statements are: - "My point was that since rap is a legitimate form of art and culture, that it can be used for good and to express certain truths. That doesn't mean that every rap song is true." - "Rappers do not necessarily live the lifestyle they rap about." I have no idea why my opponent is baffled. These statements are obviously not contradictory in any way whatsoever. Additionally both of those statements are true. My opponent should be more specific about what she doesn't understand so I can help her understand, I suppose. 6. Next I'm just going to point out some of Con's statements and explain why they are illegitimate. She writes, "Prohibiting rap music will definitely help kids make better choices." We can accept this if Con presents evidence of it being true - otherwise it's just an unsupported hypothesis. She continues, "This would eliminate rappers (many of them are on drugs), who children look up to, and they would have less of these bad role models influencing them to make bad choices." First, it's completely false that rappers would be eliminated. Rapping is a form of art and people would rap even if it were not popular in the mainstream. Second, many times kids are only enticed by what is prohibited, because it becomes cool and taboo. This will only make rap more elusive. Third, Con contradicts her 4th point. Just because some rappers do drugs doesn't mean all of them ought to be eliminated, or cannot have a positive impact. In addition to losing negative role models, positive ones can be lost as well. Con concludes by saying I have just two arguments: that profanity is rampant in other genres as well, and then she writes "I abandon previous arguments to rebut. Yours." I'm assuming that means she is dropping them, so I'll just re-cap all of my arguments thus far as a final reminder for Con's last round. Some of them will be repeated for clarity. A) Not all rap music contains profanity. B) There is excessive profanity in other genres as well, and they can also have negative effects. C) Profanity is not a big deal anyway... D) Rap, like movies, are often strictly for fictional entertainment. E) We should not negatively stereotype and draw conclusions about ALL rap songs/artists. F) Censorship is inappropriate and near impossible to enforce. G) Parents are responsible for raising their children and ensuring distinction between entertainment and real life. H) Rap is an art form, and all art can be used for positive means like self expression. I) Rap is an integral part of some children's culture and 21st century society. J) Rap songs and artists can and do use their music for good and to promote positive messages. Those are ten arguments for the PRO. Con's Dropped Arguments: - Con couldn't prove rap encourages teen pregnancy or glorifies a criminal lifestyle. Thanks, Con. I look forward to an interesting final rebuttal :) [1] http://www.braingell.com... [2] http://newsnet.byu.edu... [3] http://www.ehow.com...