Thoughts on the ownership of haters

Terry_Clubbup

I heard Shawty Lo's "Dey Know (remix)" again...and again. It's ubiquitous. His rhyme style sounds to me like a cut-rate Jeezy bite, with the asthmatic rasp raps and the Anxious Whisper Flow. But the last time I heard it, I noticed a very interesting idea on the subject of claiming ownership of haters.Here are Shawty Lo's lines (from the remix with Ludacris on it) which intrigue me:No lizziI'm hizziLike Kells - I believe I can flizziAnd yeaaaahhhh I'll see you laterBIG UPS... TO ALL MY HATERS![/b]It's this construction - my haters that I'm interested in. Perhaps this has been going on for a long time and it took 1,000 involuntary listens to "Dey Know" before I caught on to it. But as far as I knew, the construction was "the haters" or simply "haters", as in, Haters Can Eat A Dick. By attaching the possessive "my", one then can claim ownership of haters. Of course this ownership does not automatically bestow unlimited privileges - there is a mess of exceptions and protections to untangle before even getting close to one's haters. A person can own a house, but if they rent it out they are then burdened with lots of rules and exceptions to protect the rights of the tenant. Similarly, by delivering a silly and outlandish rapp song to the marketplace, Shawty Lo created a large piece of real estate that I will refer to as Hater Space[/b]. As soon as this Hater Space became populated with whatever combination of neighborhood bums, backpackers, D4L towel guys and ex-girlfriends, Shawty Lo then rightfully claimed ownership over this virtual real estate. In other words, anyone found with a pissy scowl on their face and Shawty Lo's name in their mouth could, without realizing it, have given up a piece of their natural privilege to control their own identity. Shawty Lo cannot order his haters around, or extract money or labor from them, but he is able to exert some amount of control over his haters' public identity.

faux_rillz

Man, I am glad you brought this up, because it provides me an excuse to speak on another Shawty Lo-related issue, specifically the song where he boasts that repeatedly that "Everybody know I'm bout my swag".

What part of the game is that?

Is swag something that one should be so fully invested in? Shouldn't it be the result of a more organic and effortless process?

And if you're putting that kind of work in behind your swag, should everybody really know it? Shouldn't you at least be putting forth the illusion of effortlessness?

Speak on it.

SWAG SESSION BEGINS NOW

mylatency

Shawty Lo ownz da "Hatter Space" but Terry & James clearly ownz da "Typer Space"



I'm drinking a smoothie, to all my hatterz

The-gaffler

the gaffler's current mindstate on terry's deep observation: blown





yooooooo

Terry_Clubbup

One might ask: "What is the benefit of claiming ownership over my haters?"

And I would refer to the old saying: Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.

In the process of exerting ownership rights over one's haters, one will inevitably become more familiar with the content and variety of the haters' claims. This could actually provide a type of market research, by answering two crucial questions for the artist:

1) What are people most jealous of? i.e., What part of my swag is coveted?

2) When expressing their jealousy over my swag, what details or talking points are used to build a case against me? Are these things that I could improve upon for my next album project or tour?

Hatter chatter can then provide insight as to both the strongest and the weakest elements of an artist's personal arsenal.

yuichi

Man, I am glad you brought this up, because it provides me an excuse to speak on another Shawty Lo-related issue, specifically the song where he boasts that repeatedly that "Everybody know I'm bout my swag".

What part of the game is that?

Is swag something that one should be so fully invested in? Shouldn't it be the result of a more organic and effortless process?

And if you're putting that kind of work in behind your swag, should everybody really know it? Shouldn't you at least be putting forth the illusion of effortlessness?

Speak on it.

SWAG SESSION BEGINS NOW

Clearly you're compensating for this lack of "SWAG".

verb606

I would like to posit this: Had he said "Big Ups to all my dogs!" Does that create a similar identity-swiping space? Surely, Lo's boys wouldn't admit that he has ownership of them, simply because they received a shout-out.

I believe the use of the possessive here doesn't connote ownership of, but rather affiliation with. In this case, Lo is confident enough in himself (or simply amicable enough) to extend big ups to even those who wish him ill.

Jonny_Paycheck

One needs merely to familiarize themselves with the work of one Kat Williams to understand the concept of Hater Ownership a bit better:

faux_rillz

Man, I am glad you brought this up, because it provides me an excuse to speak on another Shawty Lo-related issue, specifically the song where he boasts that repeatedly that "Everybody know I'm bout my swag".

What part of the game is that?

Is swag something that one should be so fully invested in? Shouldn't it be the result of a more organic and effortless process?

And if you're putting that kind of work in behind your swag, should everybody really know it? Shouldn't you at least be putting forth the illusion of effortlessness?

Speak on it.

SWAG SESSION BEGINS NOW

Clearly you're compensating for this lack of "SWAG".

Clearly, you struggle with reading comprehension.

But I suppose that we should be releived that we have been spared your thoughts on SWAG.

Grandfather

Those who got swag dont talk about it and those who talk about it lack swag

Grandfather

Luxurious hair is integral to SWAG

Grandfather

Luxurious hair is integral to SWAG

I might of said to much...

DB_Cooper

Those who got swag dont talk about it and those who talk about it lack swag

I would point out the redundancy of this statement, but given the current climate of uncertainty in regard to the relationship between haterism and the retention of independent agency, I deem it best to refrain.

faux_rillz

Luxurious hair is integral to SWAG

Will a large, oddly-shaped head function as an adequate substitute?



I am experiencing almost as much anxiety over Shawty Lo's domepiece as I once did over Li'l Flip's oddly ectomorphic body (PAUSE/no phreno).

Terry_Clubbup

I would like to posit this: Had he said "Big Ups to all my dogs!" Does that create a similar identity-swiping space? Surely, Lo's boys wouldn't admit that he has ownership of them, simply because they received a shout-out.

I believe the use of the possessive here doesn't connote ownership of, but rather affiliation with. In this case, Lo is confident enough in himself (or simply amicable enough) to extend big ups to even those who wish him ill.

I would like to refer here to a previous op-ed piece I posted on Soulstrut a few years ago concerning the use of "my boy" or "my boys". Unfortunately too much time has elapsed for me to use the search engine to find this particular rant, but the gist of it is my challenge that if you go around talking about "my boys" I am either going to assume that you are a proud father or a slave owner.

You make an interesting point here, but we must remember that the quality of the noun is as important as the use of the modifier "my". For example, if you say "my friends" anyone who speaks English will understand you to mean people with whom you are friendly. Noone will accuse you of attempting to own these people by saying "my" when you refer to them, because it is implied that this is a mutually satisfactory, agreed upon relationship.

In the case of haters, as opposed to friends, we cannot assume a mutually satisfactory relationship. Haters come in all stripes and conditions and they often appropriate their part of Hater Space for no apparent reason. Take for example the backpacker brand of Shawty Lo hater - he may post anti-Shawty Lo rants on the internet from his small apartment in Montreal or Northampton, but he would never want to actually affiliate himself with Shawty Lo. I argue that by insinuating affiliation in a non-mutual, non-consensual relationship, Shawty Lo is effectively creating the case for ownership.

It may help to consider the concept of ownership with regard to use of power and control, as opposed to actual physical proximity.

Jonny_Paycheck

Hence the increased usage by those in the know of the term "my mans" (sometimes coupled with "and them")

HarveyCanal

Haters are like puppets on strings that you control. Thus, they are owned like property.

And swag has nothing to do with the wholly euro-centric concept of effortlessness.

faux_rillz

Haters are like puppets on strings that you control. Thus, they are owned like property.

And swag has nothing to do with the wholly euro-centric concept of effortlessness.

expound

HarveyCanal

Those who got swag dont talk about it and those who talk about it lack swag

WRONG! Shit's way more deliberate and overt than y'all are making it to to be.

Duderonomy

Clearly, you struggle with reading comprehension.

But I suppose that we should be releived[/b] that we have been spared your thoughts on SWAG.

The struggle never ends, it just gets pwned.

HarveyCanal

I would like to posit this: Had he said "Big Ups to all my dogs!" Does that create a similar identity-swiping space? Surely, Lo's boys wouldn't admit that he has ownership of them, simply because they received a shout-out.

I believe the use of the possessive here doesn't connote ownership of, but rather affiliation with. In this case, Lo is confident enough in himself (or simply amicable enough) to extend big ups to even those who wish him ill.

I would like to refer here to a previous op-ed piece I posted on Soulstrut a few years ago concerning the use of "my boy" or "my boys". Unfortunately too much time has elapsed for me to use the search engine to find this particular rant, but the gist of it is my challenge that if you go around talking about "my boys" I am either going to assume that you are a proud father or a slave owner.

You make an interesting point here, but we must remember that the quality of the noun is as important as the use of the modifier "my". For example, if you say "my friends" anyone who speaks English will understand you to mean people with whom you are friendly. Noone will accuse you of attempting to own these people by saying "my" when you refer to them, because it is implied that this is a mutually satisfactory, agreed upon relationship.

In the case of haters, as opposed to friends, we cannot assume a mutually satisfactory relationship. Haters come in all stripes and conditions and they often appropriate their part of Hater Space for no apparent reason. Take for example the backpacker brand of Shawty Lo hater - he may post anti-Shawty Lo rants on the internet from his small apartment in Montreal or Northampton, but he would never want to actually affiliate himself with Shawty Lo. I argue that by insinuating affiliation in a non-mutual, non-consensual relationship, Shawty Lo is effectively creating the case for ownership.

It may help to consider the concept of ownership with regard to use of power and control, as opposed to actual physical proximity.

HarveyCanal

Haters are like puppets on strings that you control. Thus, they are owned like property.

And swag has nothing to do with the wholly euro-centric concept of effortlessness.

expound

Swag doesn't come natural. It comes from grinding.

Swag is not to be confused with JFK Jr.-like regality.

Swag is knowing full well that you have every intention to rub your haterss faces in your glory.

Swag is not aloof. It's more about payback than it is rising above it all.

Basically, if you aren't flaunting your swag, you ain't got any swag.

Grandfather

I think he may perhaps be referring the Haters out there that direct their Hatred to him specifically.
In this day and age, haters are everywhere, and in all shapes and forms but if he was to casually mention "...big up to all haters" the idea might get lost. Then it becomes a discussion about what specifically makes one a hater and therefore do you fall into the category of entities that Shawty is big upping? If he rapped in such a manner, the door is left open to all different kinds of anomalies in the specifics of Haterdom. What if he is big upping the people who hate those who hate him?
From my point of view, his line made the idea of what haters he was referring to by clearly pointing out "my haters".

Grandfather

Haters are like puppets on strings that you control. Thus, they are owned like property.

And swag has nothing to do with the wholly euro-centric concept of effortlessness.

expound

Swag doesn't come natural. It comes from grinding.

Swag is not to be confused with JFK Jr.-like regality.

Swag is knowing full well that you have every intention to rub your haterss faces in your glory.

Swag is not aloof. It's more about payback than it is rising above it all.

Basically, if you aren't flaunting your swag, you ain't got any swag.

You are right.

Especially here:

Basically, if you aren't flaunting your swag, you ain't got any swag.

hogginthefogg

Big up to all haters of my remix of said song:
http://www.zshare.net/audio/101825391e8e411b/

verb606

It may help to consider the concept of ownership with regard to use of power and control, as opposed to actual physical proximity.

I suppose that by affiliation, I really meant "affinity" and I saw it as a one-way relationship, meaning from Lo to the haters. As you stated, there is no love or affinity going the other way. By creating/acknowledging affinity with his own haters through use of the word "my", he denies the power of their hatred, thus rendering him more powerful in the relationship. It's as if he says, "I welcome your hate, I thrive on it! Your hate is like love to me."

Both our theories are based on power, so it seems that we are essentially in agreement.

djdaze

Luxurious hair is integral to SWAG

I might of said to much...

you might HAVE lost your SWAG

DJ_Enki

What if you hate swag?

faux_rillz

What if you hate swag?

Then you probably watch Lost religiously.

Terry_Clubbup

One needs merely to familiarize themselves with the work of one Kat Williams to understand the concept of Hater Ownership a bit better:

This Kat Williams bit is really useful in that it allows us to quantify hatership, and illustrates that one's identity and perception of worth does go hand in hand with the number of haters one owns.

"Fellas if you got 20 haters you need 40 of them motherfuckers, what the fuck is you complaining about?"

It occurred to me over the weekend that in a balleuriffic society, one would do well to ask after the status of another baller's haters on a regular basis. Of course this particular social transaction should only take place after one has inquired as to the well-being of: 1) the baller him/herself, 2) the baller's mom'n'nem, and 3) the baller's stacks of acquisitions. It is my opinion that a modern, educated society can truly be judged by how it treats its haters.

Here is an example of how this would work in an everyday situation. In this hypothetical exchange, I run into Jonny Paychecks on the skreet:

Me: Say, Paycheezewiz! Don't tell me this day hasn't treated you well.

Jonny: Oh so very, Terry Clizzo.

Me: How's your mom'n'nem?

Jonny: Safe, sound, and occasionally out-of-bounds.

Me: I assume your weekend finds still causing collectro-epilepsty.

Jonny: When you come by Good Records, bring your tongue depressor.

Me: Oh yeah, Jonny...how are your haters doing?

Jonny: Steady swinging. Still swag jacking, growing in numbers by the day....we had one in the hospital last week with a stroke, but he's getting better. I have to go hannel my B.I. now Clizzo.

Me: [I don't know that handshake] Ah, okay...Audi Five Million then.[/b]


So you see, asking after one's haters amplifies the level of respect across an entire community. If you see me in the street - please, ask about my haters.
And I will do the same for you.

HarveyCanal

One needs merely to familiarize themselves with the work of one Kat Williams to understand the concept of Hater Ownership a bit better:

This Kat Williams bit is really useful in that it allows us to quantify hatership, and illustrates that one's identity and perception of worth does go hand in hand with the number of haters one owns.

"Fellas if you got 20 haters you need 40 of them motherfuckers, what the fuck is you complaining about?"

It occurred to me over the weekend that in a balleuriffic society, one would do well to ask after the status of another baller's haters on a regular basis. Of course this particular social transaction should only take place after one has inquired as to the well-being of: 1) the baller him/herself, 2) the baller's mom'n'nem, and 3) the baller's stacks of acquisitions. It is my opinion that a modern, educated society can truly be judged by how it treats its haters.

Here is an example of how this would work in an everyday situation. In this hypothetical exchange, I run into Jonny Paychecks on the skreet:

Me: Say, Paycheezewiz! Don't tell me this day hasn't treated you well.

Jonny: Oh so very, Terry Clizzo.

Me: How's your mom'n'nem?

Jonny: Safe, sound, and occasionally out-of-bounds.

Me: I assume your weekend finds still causing collectro-epilepsty.

Jonny: When you come by Good Records, bring your tongue depressor.

Me: Oh yeah, Jonny...how are your haters doing?

Jonny: Steady swinging. Still swag jacking, growing in numbers by the day....we had one in the hospital last week with a stroke, but he's getting better. I have to go hannel my B.I. now Clizzo.

Me: [I don't know that handshake] Ah, okay...Audi Five Million then.[/b]


So you see, asking after one's haters amplifies the level of respect across an entire community. If you see me in the street - please, ask about my haters.
And I will do the same for you.

REVEAL YOUR RUNNING LIST OR YOU'RE SOFT.