Lauren Ashwell claimed that Objectionable lyric content is inappropriate. With melodious tune and powerful beat in the song, it will shape our understanding of the song. Also, the aggressiveness within the lyric is not strong enough to manipulate our minds to contribute to criminal actions, But it does have the power to subconsciousness shape our interaction with other subjects. However, Chris Richards and Rick Ross hold a different perspective of view on this particular topic. They agree that most artists are just “painting pictures.” In the words, they didn’t mean what they say. They are describing rather than endorsing. In response to Richard and Ross, Ashwell argues that due to the power imbalance between fans(most of them are ordinary citizens) and artists, the offensiveness within the lyrics may impact the common society in a deep way. Especially under the conditions where sexiest are still embedded in the spin of our lovely community. Then she indicates that as a white man, it’s not acceptable to singing about tasting “Brown Sugar” under current social status.
For songs like “Brown sugar” is just meaningless and unacceptable in any way. However, not all Songs with objectionable lyrics fallow to the same category. In my opinion, there are many other controversial songs (lyric-wise) that promote a bigger subject than sexual fantasizing a black woman. John Poland and Matt Strohl both have mentioned that many of them serve as protest songs. A lot of artists have grown up in a community that is filled with chaos and inequality. Many of them use violent or direct language to “vivid” illustrate fans what is like to live in that community. In this case, the objectionable language serves a different purpose than “Brown Sugar”