wow, that was amazing. aside from all the implications, it's a wonderful sound. where can i buy the record???

This reminds me of Jenny Owen Youngs' cover of Nelly's 'Hot in Here' - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwuIIsDjgZg&ob=av2e

Ben Folds also does a cover of this song. I wonder if it has the same sort of resistant implications if sung by a white man or if it means something different.

... not all white.

not all white

This is very cute and funny.

But I'm struggling to articulate what's bothering me about it, or maybe not the video itself, but reactions to it. Is it funny because it's using/subverting the idea that rich preppy white girls are purest fragile sexless porcelain, or is it trading on that stereotype? And thus implicitly reinforcing the reverse, that poor black girls are fair game to be seen as skanky bitches, but isn't the idea just HILARIOUS when applied to rich white girls?

Not sure. Making me uncomfortable and sad that some might view it that way.

And yeah, not all white. ;)

Damn. But what the hell difference does it make what they are wearing? You all come across like gender police, gotta keep them ("pure white") bitches in their place. Glad to see that what a woman looks like, and how she dresses, is more important than what she's saying, or singing. Keep the patriarchy alive!

I think the interpretation of the "rich white girl trappings" is that the original song is clearly not about people of that stereotype group; dressing up like that to sing it just serves to delegitimize the song even further.

I saw this a week or so ago and have been thinking about it (and Ben Folds' version) ever since. There is a lot going on here and I can't decide what I think!

Based on the imagery, it seems like it's more mocking along racial and class lines than reappropriating a misogynistic song. I'm not sure this video uniquely displays the song as grossly misogynistic as the lyrics already do this (i.e. being misogynistic is the direct meaning of the song).

I think the "rich" look is supposed to add to the irony. If they looked more street or hip-hop it wouldn't be as funny. Just like white people (especially women) don't rap, rich people don't rap. It's just taking the unlikely singers to another level. I think it would work similarly if it was rich-dressing black women. Maybe not quite as ironic because of the association of black people with rap, but dressed in tennis outfits and pearls, close. The "rich" look just adds another layer of contrast between the performers and their song.

Well, they *are* preppy women. Ivy league a capella is the preppiest and (traditionally) whitest imaginable pursuit. It generally features a lot of tunes originally written and performed by black artists, covered by a bunch of white guys in letter jackets, and arranged in a way that erases as much as possible of the african-american influence. I think this group is mocking that kind of appropriation by taking it to a ridiculous (and hilarious) extreme.

To clarify, I didn't meant hat white people don't rap, but that society generalizes rap as more of a black art than white.

The ironic, whitewashed cover/parody of rap songs is not a remotely novel phenomenon. It dates back at least 10 years, to Dynamite Hack's cover of 'Boyz-n-the-Hood,' maybe earlier than that. A cursory YouTube search will likely yield similar covers for any of hip hop's mainstream classic cuts.

The 'humor' in these covers is, in my view, derived from mockery of black modes of expression. By recontextualising hip hop lyrics within a 'normal' (i.e. white) musical form, the aim is to expose the tropes of hip hop as inherently ridiculous. Regardless of how accurately those tropes reflect the realities of black culture, as the pre-eminent pop cultural outlet for black male voices, hip hop here is being used as a stand-in for black culture as a whole. The subtext boils down to "Aren't those black people FUNNY? And isn't it HILARIOUS when us upstanding WHITE people do things that only BLACK people do?" Some previous commenters have noted some degree of discomfort with the racial politics of this video. As far as I'm concerned it's a modern-day minstrel show.

Whatever subversive message is communicated by the performers in this case being women, it's mitigated by the perpetuation of the racism typical of the form.

In reading the costuming choices, one thing we may be overlooking is that in some contexts, they would help the viewer to read this performance as subversive. If the young women had chosen to dress in their interpretation of hip-hop clothes, a viewer encountering this video "cold" would be more likely to see it as "Look at those pathetic white girls trying to rap," and to miss the intentional juxtaposition of the song with the singers. The context in which *we* have encountered the video makes the signal sent by the costumes superfluous, but this blog is not the video's intended context.

(I am inclined to think that most people would have gotten it anyway if the girls had just worn what they normally wear to singing group practice, but I can forgive a group of young people for thinking that the type of social signals they see and send every day have to be over-performed in order to be obvious.)

"(I am inclined to think that most people would have gotten it anyway if the girls had just worn what they normally wear to singing group practice, but I can forgive a group of young people for thinking that the type of social signals they see and send every day have to be over-performed in order to be obvious.)"

... And based on a quick scan of the 60-odd Youtube comments accompanying the video, you might just be wrong about people "getting it". Any people.

That said, I agree with your interpretation of the intent and the criticism.

Oh, you know what? I'm fairly sure, now, that this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjNNxnKVEpQ&feature=related
Is what they're responding to, not either the original or the Ben Folds version.

With this additional context, everything makes sense now, including the costume choices.

Sorry but I can't understand most of the words.

(per the summary) Their use of race, class, and gender contradictions really forced me to think about the song in a new way! This really exposes the song as grossly misogynistic! Awesome!

I think the sociological questions here is:

Why does a group of white the girls singing the song force the song "reveals itself as misogynistic"?

Does it really do that?? Because if you needed a bunch of white girls to sing the song to reveal that what does that say about society?

If a group of black or Indian or Chinese or any other "racial" group of women was singing it in this fashion would it still be misogyny or would it just be funny?

It is not like it's a trade secret that rap music has a tenuous relationship with women. The fact that a choral group decided to sing the song is more funny to me than anything else. It may have been a conscious juxtaposition but done to call attention to the fact that these girls are and are not at the same time the bitches Dr. Dre is speaking of. And look based on what he said in the song, who hasn't had a crappy relationship with someone? Sounds like the song is more of a reaction on his part to being "dissed" by a girl.

America is obsessed by race and not in any positive moving forward ways. It would be nice if we could let a rap song be a rap song. It's rap... not Simon and Garfunkel.

I think some of you might be misinterpreting the original song here. "Bitches Ain't Shit" is a diss track directed at the (now deceased) Eazy-E (real name Eric Wright), he (a man) is the one who is the bitch who "ain't shit but a ho and a trick." Of course feminizing someone as an insult is in itself a pretty misogynistic thing, but the song is not the all out attack on the female gender that it initially sounds like.

Furthermore, the original song actually ends with a verse by the female rapper Jewell that uses the same vocabulary as the rest of the song, was she not already doing exactly what these women are doing now?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I feel like this is just a group of women doing something ironically and humorously, not with a larger message. I think it's projecting to hope that they are trying to subvert the message of the original song. Many male groups are getting viral hits by covering songs like Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance." I think this group is just going for the same sort of thing. Just because you sing an obscene, debasing song doesn't mean you're trying to highlight it's inherent misogyny.

To me also it kind of missed the mark on its intent. Because so often we see girls participating in their degrading video and lyrics, this just felt like the same thing.

Just to throw this one out there -- what about the fact that an almost all-white, presumably privileged (they're at Cornell) group is using the n-word multiple times?

Sure, it's in the context of covering a song, but does that make it ok?

I imagine that many of us are concerned with gender relations, so this video actually raises a question of mine that perhaps can find some enlightenment here.

A lot of R&B and hip-hop songs depict an uncomfortable polarization between the genders as well as an emphasis on material possessions. I was listening to a Missy Elliot track the other day, and these lines caught my attention:

Girl, girl, get that cash
If it's 9 to 5 or shakin' your ass
Ain't no shame, ladies do your thing
Just make sure you ahead of the game

Conversely, many of the male artists warn against "gold diggers," or else posit the relationship between men and women as sexual and commercial, with women being disposable receptacles, if not actively vampiric and worthless.

These songs make the relationship between men and women (particularly between African American men and women) sound combative, hostile and full of suspicion. How much of this is just posturing? Is there any foundation of truth? Or is this as much of a mirror as, say, Justin Bieber, which is to say, not at all?

Just thought you should know that when this got cross-posted at Jezebel, the crossed out word "all" shows up as not being crossed out. I think you guys might want to fix that type of error. It's great that you leave corrections visible for us here, but if they don't show up with the strikethrough when they're republished, that could cause confusion or worse.

absolutely brilliant!

Seriously, people? Must there be a discussion everywhere? Can't we all just agree that this is a totally rockin' punch at that bitch Dre?

They are making fun of a really stupid song. That's enough really. And good for them for doing it.

Part of it, too, might be that the whitest of women, which these women represent with their pearls and popped collars and tennis rackets, aren't supposed to even know about stuff like rap. It reminds of something that happened on Desperate Housewives (forgive me for not knowing any names or anything; I just happened across this scene): The conservative woman character is in bed with her boyfriend and the boyfriend wants to orally pleasure her, but she stops him, insisting, "No, I can't. I'm a Republican." Republicans aren't supposed to even know about (female) oral sex, let alone like it.
But of course, this is probably not about race, class, gender, or political affiliation: It's probably just about being pretentious hipsters.

Some men hate women. Some women hate men. Get over it.

@ gxm17:
I didn't say any of those things...?
Let me try this one more time.
I hear you saying: these women, however white/upperclass they may (or may not) be, are women. And as such, they have every right to have, and express, opinions on sex and gender without being silenced. I FULLY AGREE. I am not silencing or discounting their primary message. I haven't even commented on it, really. FTR, I agree with it.

What I'm saying is (and believe me, it's a fraction of what I'm thinking), there are also some unintended race/class/gender messages at play here, and they are problematic.

Race, class and gender are connected. They... intersect. Which is why the outfits, which you seem to dismiss, are in fact very relevant. It's a specific choice the group made when it came to framing their message. Except they reference not just stereotypes of gender, but also of race and class. They're stereotypical "upper-class WASP miss" getups. Whiiich means that this group specifically (if unintentionally) chose to reference not "the" oppressive womanly ideal but "an" oppressive womanly ideal— one that's historically been used to oppress only one particular kind of woman. Hmm.

But there's more. While this particular ideal has historically been used to oppress WW in relation to WM... it has simultaneously been used to elevate WW in relation to other women and MOC. So... yeah. It's an in-your-face multiproblem when a nearly all-WW group taps that imagery, however ironically, while criticizing BM for their inappropriate sexual attitudes. You know? And the thing is, it would have been so easy to do this without all that. (Wear their regular clothes?)

BTW, I'm not saying "they're doing more harm than good and shouldn't have bothered, they should stfu!" or anything like that.

“And the thing is, it would have been so easy to do this without all that. (Wear their regular clothes?)?”

Rap culture is dominant. Even privileged college students dabble in it. See the Berkeley group wearing sneakers & hoodies. They’re obviously not OG. But these kids probably cranked Dr. Dre when driving the family station-wagon to soccer practice. Their “regular” clothing made the performance seem affectionate.

As Ros said, WASP clothing removes them from the rap context. And the WASP is a relic of the past. They may as well have dressed up like Marie Antoinette. See Vice Magazine for how privileged white people dress today.

I understand & appreciate you tackling the uncomfortable issue of race. It’s a tough subject & one worth pondering. But Dre got rich by selling his sexist garbage to (mostly) suburban white boys. He’s hardly a victim. The comparisons to Emmit Till are reminiscent of Jesse Jackson comments about LeBron James.

> white women enjoy certain significant privileges over nonwhite women

This is not a "simple fact". It is incorrect. It is a lie. Maybe it's the way you THINK it is, but you're wrong. When you say something like that, you become part of the problem, not the solution. Because that is a stereotype, and it is just as ugly a stereotype as the stereotypes presented in the original song by Dr. Dre. You do not get it, and I don't think you ever will. The sooner this nation repudiates this reverse racism the better. These young women knew exactly what they were doing. They are definitely commenting on rap misogyny, but they are also (very obviously) commenting on the race issue and the woman's issue. They are saying question it ALL, including racist and/or sexist remarks about white women. It's about girls and women who "like the beat" and don't care about the words. It's about double standards of all sexes and colors. If the races are reversed, the same standard applies, and inasmuch as you use different standards, then you are part of the problem. It reminds me of a comic panel I saw on the internet -- an obviously "white" couple, attractive, are sunbathing on the beach in bathing suits, and the man says to the woman "I think I'd like gangsta rap more if it wasn't about killing people like me."

Oh, and don't forget -- if the sexes are reversed, the same standard applies, too.

John,

I submit that you are indeed the liar. White women are treated and perceived better than white women by many people. If perpetuating the truth is a problem to you that is unfortunate. I believe shining a light on societies ills rather then clicking my heels together and hoping.

"It’s about girls and women who “like the beat” and don’t care about the words."

While I can't argue the quality of the beat, one of the girls that is ignorant about the words of this song is you. The subject of the song is about the authors former musical collaborator and friend, a male. Feminizing a man by referencing to him as "she" arguably could be mildly misogynistic, but not one person here has brought that up. If you cared to read the lyrics of the original song you would know that this song is homophobic, if anything. That takes away the supposed point of this "social commentary" on misogyny by these women.

The real thing that has been over looked by almost everyone here is that this cover is racist, albeit maybe not intentionally. It has also brought out that most people here along with these women know nothing about young black "hip hop" culture, nor care to actually research the very song they are condemning.

Bitch - a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman.

How exactly is the word "bitch" misogynistic? By the very definition it is being used correctly in the song to describe malicious, unpleasant, selfish persons of both sexes. It is you that choose to consider the artist pointing out people of both sexes malevolence as an attack solely on woman.

In one of the last verses there is a chronicle of a gentlemen who had a girlfriend, that he says he loves, that ends up cheating on him with his cousin. Is this woman not a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person? Additionally he recounts how he is "heart broke" by her infidelity. It would seem he is not exactly the callous monster you make him out to be.

Additionally, did you realize that the last verses were performed by a woman? While boasting about herself she recites the line "Becuase I am a bitch that is real".

What people here fail to realize is that the word bitch is not inherently misogynistic, and in this case exclusively derogatory. The fact that everyone has jumped to conclusions about this song being misogynistic proves how lazy, ignorant, out of touch, and possibly racist, the girls from Columbia are.

Ironically, Dr. Dre would rightly consider these girls and commentators on this board "bitches who ain't shit".

> White women are treated and perceived better than white women by many people.

Oops. Can I assume you meant "White women are treated and perceived better than black women by many people."?

If so, then I counter with "And: Black women are also treated and perceived better than white women by many people." Including you. So what? The truth is racism comes in many colors. When was the last time you acknowledged racism against whites? You are not telling the WHOLE truth. Just the part of the truth. You are the problem, not me.

By the way I'm not a girl. (Though this is not the point, I think it's a good exercise to switch genders every once in a while, to test everyone's prejudices). And this song is not "homophobic" except in the most oversensitive extremely rhetorical sense. (By the way, the word "homophobe" is a BS word too, all it means nowadays is "a straight person that I don't like"). Was the intention of Dr. Dre to be misogynistic or misanthropic? Because it's either one or the other. So far I have found nothing to indicate either.

At some point, you are venturing into "words mean what I say they mean" territory. Bitch is not misogynistic if it refers to a female dog. Any other use I'm not so sure about. I can find no definition of "bitch" that doesn't imply a female. Therefore, I assert the the WORD ITSELF is sexist. It is, in general, considered silly for me to call a man a bitch (unless you want to wade into homosexual stereotypes). And yes, women calling each other "bitches" is not as offensive as men calling women "bitches". But that's the point -- this is using words as weapons, and it's a weapon that men aren't allowed to use. "It's not fair, it's just the way it is". Well pardon me if I want to change that. You can't have it both ways.

Dr. Dre is playing with words, but that doesn't absolve him. He still doesn't get to choose what words mean. After all, what does "bitches ain't shit" mean? Does it mean "bitches" are worse that shit or better than shit?

Actually, does “bitches ain’t shit” mean anything at all?

fuck bitches get money

i hate niggers and women those cunts should be in the kitchen cooking dinner not singing. i'd give them a set of black eyes if i could.

Anything that mocks the ridiculous, violent, inarticulate, misogynistic unpleasant music churned out by "gangsters" is great in my book

these bitches can't rap.

First of all, this a cover of a pop cover of the song by Ben Folds, second of all 2 of the « bitches” the lyrics refer to are men ( incl. NWA infamous manager Eric Wright.

so it might be bitter but not misogynistic. If you insult men and women the same way in the same lyric I call it equality.

Not very thoroughly researched for a PhD...you should probably edit your post here.