Why stations are pulling Little Big Town’s ‘Girl Crush’ —

From the link:

Alana Lynn, a morning co-host on country music station 104.3 FM in Boise, Idaho, was excited to play Little Big Town’s latest single for her listeners. “Girl Crush,” a powerful ballad about a woman envious of her ex-boyfriend’s new girlfriend, seemed destined to be a hit.

“I want to taste her lips, yeah cause they taste like you / I want to drown myself in a bottle of her perfume,” vocalist Karen Fairchild sings. “I want her long blond hair, I want her magic touch / Yeah cause maybe then, you’d want me just as much. . . I got a girl crush.”

Sure, it’s a provocative way to describe jealousy. But when Lynn played the song on the air, she didn’t anticipate that she would get furious phone calls and e-mails accusing “Girl Crush” of “promoting the gay agenda” and threats to boycott the station. The last time she heard this much outrage from listeners? “The Dixie Chicks’ President Bush comments,” Lynn recalls.

People are misinterpreting the song to be about a lesbian relationship, even though it is really about a woman envious of her ex-boyfriend's new girlfriend. Some listeners of country radio stations are demanding that they take the song off of the radio, saying that it promotes the "gay agenda."

So what does that say about those country radio listeners if they are so hateful of gays that they will force a song that isn't even about gays but seems like it is about gays, off the radio?

This isn't all country fans, though - the song is #4 on the country sales charts on Itunes and is still #34 in radio rankings. It could just be a few extremists calling into the radio stations making threats to stop listening.

Syndicated radio personality Bobby Bones, who hosts the nation’s most popular country morning show, fumed about this topic to his millions of listeners last week while Little Big Town was in the studio. “Is it frustrating to you that here is your song — that is one of the Top 10 sellers for weeks and weeks and weeks — and people on the radio are still afraid to play it because they think it’s a ‘lesbian song?’” he asked. “It would drive me insane!”

The group agreed. “Just the fact that we’re still discussing that, number one, there’s so many problems with that whole issue,” Fairchild said.

“It shouldn’t even matter if it’s a lesbian song, is the first thing,” Bones added. Though, of course, that has been proven to matter. Look no further than Kacey Musgraves and “Follow Your Arrow,” the song referencing same-sex kissing that racked up awards and sales but struggled to find a radio audience. Even in 2015, the subject is still a taboo in the genre.

What do you guys think?

My thoughts are that I can totally understand how the lyrics could be misinterpreted, but I don't think I would stop playing the song if I was a radio DJ.

Personally, it's a stupid song, but I'm not a country fan.

And I don't think the majority of country fans are anti gay. If so, a couple of the "big" named guys singers would have been canned for coming out. What, last year or something?

I think it is just a few idiot fanatics.

But I agree. The first time I heard it, I thought it was about a real "girl crush"

It's this kind of hate that makes me want to gag every time some 'Bagger claims this is a "Christian nation", when it so obviously isn't....unless I missed the verse where Jesus commanded folk to hate others...

a reply to: darkbake

People don't like the gay agenda.

I don't either.

I don't care who loves who, but I don't have to like it, I don't want it shoved in my face.

I am aloud to have my own opinions on any subject.

I don't agree in this instance that it is the gay agenda at work honestly, I heard the song several times on the radio.

This is what happens though when you force things on people.

They react, even to retarded examples.

a reply to: johnwick

Yeah, I hate it when The Straight Agenda is shoved in my face. All these straight folk, kissing and publicly loving each other..my God think of the CHILDREN!!!!!


That's sarcasm. Thought it might need to be pointed out.

a reply to: darkbake

Lol I find this hilarious. Some people are so idiotic in their hate. Stupid is as stupid does.

a reply to: johnwick

I think a lot of gay people feel like Christians are forcing their anti-gay views on them... not allowing them to get married and everything.

Other than that particular point, so far I've seen reasonable responses on here.

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

Yeah, I hate it when The Straight Agenda is shoved in my face. All these straight folk, kissing and publicly loving each other..my God think of the CHILDREN!!!!!


That's sarcasm. Thought it might need to be pointed out.

There is no straight agenda.

It is the natural human mindset.

Sure there is a very tiny subset with a different perspective.

Sorry for them they aren't the normal mainstream mindset.

Be a part of a fringe group, don't expect to be treated like the mainstream.

Over 98% of humans in america are straight.

That means they are "normal".

The 2% are "abnormal", meaning not doing as the vast majority.

Portraying them as "normal", is a fiction.

This doesn't mean they are evil crazy or whatever your derogative word of choice.

It just means they are counter to "normal" sexuality.

They are likely the exact same as most folks in the rest of their lives, just abnormal in the sexuality portion.

Which is a huge chunk of adult human life.

So no I don't hate gays.

Hell I sm glad they found someone to love.

Do I have to think it is perfectly natural and normal, no, it is neither IMHO but who am I to judge right wrong or whatever.

I am just a guy, as messed up as everyone else, that does have much of it figured out, that doesn't even know which way this crazy mudball will turn next.

Double post FTW!!!!

a reply to: johnwick

No "straight agenda"? Tell that to Indiana. tell that to the "compassionate Christian" in California who is pushing a law to have non-straights shot in the head. Tell that to the folks pushing to have a friggin' song pulled from the radio because it violates their agenda. Tell that to the kids who are bullied daily and not a d*** thing gets done. Don't you DARE tell me there is no "straight agenda". That, my friend, is the highest ignorance - something ATS was supposedly founded to deny.

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: johnwick

I think a lot of gay people feel like Christians are forcing their anti-gay views on them... not allowing them to get married and everything.

Other than that particular point, so far I've seen reasonable responses on here.

I do agree here.

Now I believe tradition christian marriage is between a man and a woman.

So violating this could be offensive to them.

But gays should have the right to be just as miserable in divorce court as everyone else.

Call it "gay marriage" or whatever just not marriage.

Same rights etc under the law.

The problem is, that isn't good enough.

They want to force Christians to accept them, and relent on the "marriage" issue.

Nobody has to accept them.

It is a persons right to be prejudiced, is it right?

No not really. But they are still aloud to.

Why can't people have their own views and opinions anymore?

Hell people even get fired for it.

a reply to: johnwick

Let's make it fair..let's make marriage only for Christians..that is what they want, after all. So no Muslim marriage, no atheist marriage, no Jewish marriage, Sikh, Hindi, etc. Hmm...what if a Baptist wants to marry a Catholic? Guess we better nix that, too, as it's "unnatural".

Or we can shut the h*** up and lets the LGBT community have the exact same rights as everyone else in 'Murica, hey?

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

No "straight agenda"? Tell that to Indiana. tell that to the "compassionate Christian" in California who is pushing a law to have non-straights shot in the head. Tell that to the folks pushing to have a friggin' song pulled from the radio because it violates their agenda. Tell that to the kids who are bullied daily and not a d*** thing gets done. Don't you DARE tell me there is no "straight agenda". That, my friend, is the highest ignorance - something ATS was supposedly founded to deny.

There is no straight agenda.

Is there a non ginger agenda?

Ginger kids get made fun of too.

How about fat kids?

Or poor kids?

The truth is, any subset will be made fun of.

It is a fact of the world and part of human nature.

If they don't like being made fun of because they are gay too flipping bad.

Neither does the ginger or the fat kid or the poor kid etc....

It is the way humans are.

Tell em to grow thicker skin rub some dirt on it and get over it like everyone else.

People especially kids are mean to each other.

Being a crybaby isn't going to do a thing but make it worse.

BTW I am a native of Indiana, born and raised for my first 35 years.

It is a much more tolerant place than you are trying say it is here.

I am in Texas now, down here they just use the N word in public like it is nothing.

a reply to: johnwick

The difference is, no one is making laws with the specific intent of diminishing gingers, or "fat kids", or those other subsets, save possibly women.

Im still looking out for this gay agenda, in my 20s i lived in the village in montreal, the rent was cheap, and the only difference
Is alot of the stores had rainbow flags.

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

The difference is, no one is making laws with the specific intent of diminishing gingers, or "fat kids", or those other subsets, save possibly women.

Woman aren't a subset btw they are a majority.

They aren't making laws against woman, they are making laws against killing unborn children.

A man plays a equal role in reproduction. It does take 2 to make a child.

Yet the woman is the only party leftists think deserves a say in the matter.

If the man doesn't want the child and the woman does, now the man must pau for it for 18 years.

Seems woman are the only party that has any rights in reproduction to me.

She gets to decide whether the baby lives or dies, and on her sole decision, the man then may have to pay a crap ton of money for 18 years.

So I think woman have plenty of rights not afforded to men in the reproduction department.

I have found working in education a lot of people who rally against the "gay agenda" as they put it have latent homosexual urges so they are basically fighting against what they fear the most, themselves showing any form of same sex attraction.

Shame to think we are all born, live and die the same and yet people still lose their sh*t over where someone put's their private parts. Music imo should be thought of like this:

1. Like it - Wooo good music
2. Dont like it - Ignore it and get on with your life
3. Find it offensive - Ignore it and get on with your life

a reply to: johnwick

Even when the issue is a contraceptive that isn't abortive? Oh, and I suppose the idea that women should make as much as a man, or have an equal say in governance, that's wrong, too?

a reply to: johnwick

I think men always have the option to not have sex with women indiscriminately, saving themselves a pregnancy issue.

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

Even when the issue is a contraceptive that isn't abortive? Oh, and I suppose the idea that women should make as much as a man, or have an equal say in governance, that's wrong, too?

Woman don't deserve free birth control.

I have to pay for my rubbers, she can pay for her pills.

To the rest of your bs...yes I must be a woman beating hillbilly that believes all woman belong barefoot and pregnant chained to the stove with just enough slack to reach the bed.

Why don't they deserve fare compensation and voting rights?

Are you projecting your disdain for woman's equality on me?