It’s circa 1975.
I’m about 9 years old and my sister is 6 or so. Our living room is a stage set and we’ve invited our mother to sit for a quick performance. We’re holding pretend microphones and wearing my mother’s Diana Ross and the Supremes wigs, which sit slightly askew on our heads. (Every black woman in America had at least one of those wigs back then.)
But we’re not getting ready to sing a Diana Ross song. Oh no. I cue the record player and we begin to sing Luther Ingram’s “If Loving You is Wrong (I Don’t Want to be Right).” Yep. That was the song. I’ll never forget it.
Here are some of the lyrics:
“If lovin’ you is wrong, I don’t wanna be right. /If being right means being without you I’d rather live a wrong doin’ life./ Your mama and daddy say it’s a shame it’s a down right disgrace./But long as I got you by my side I don’t care what your people say./ Your friends tell you it’s no future in loving a married man./If I can’t see you when I want I’ll see you when I can.”
Yep, that was the song two otherwise innocent little girls learned without their mother knowing. And yep, that was the song that caused her face to knot and contort, wondering if we had lost our minds or, worse, possibly understood what we were singing.
Certainly we were completely oblivious to the idea of a cheating husband trying to persuade a woman to be his mistress.
And because my mother knew that, our performance, which became our swan song, was forgiven and it became a lesson for her to separate certain records from others.
I thought about this scene last week while talking to a much-younger colleague about the postponed trial of Mr. Explicit Lyrics himself, R&B singer R. Kelly.
We all know that music lyrics, which have long teased and flirted with sex and innuendo, have become ever more graphic. We also know that listeners, even young ones, have become ever more savvy and tolerant of said graphic lyrics.
My colleague and I were lamenting the legion of fans who know the 40-year-old Kelly is awaiting trial on child pornography charges and believe he’s guilty but don’t (emphasis on “don’t”) care.
Since the June 2002 indictment, these fans have continued to feed off Kelly’s raunchy (and often absurdly comical) lyrics, and they keep waiting for him to further push the notion of taste and good sense, in music and his video serial, “Trapped in a Closet.”
After the travails of Michael Jackson and Lindsay and Britney and any number of high-profile folk, I no longer try to predict how fans might react to the spectacles.
More Top Picks Sand Landscapes
But one would think that if you — as a celebrity or whoever — have been indicted for allegedly doing nasty things with little girls — prosecutors say Kelly videotaped himself having sex with a girl who may have been 13 — you’d clean up your lyrics. If for no other reason than to save face as you await trial.
But I guess not. And, there’s no reason to do so when fans continue to gobble up your recordings. Over the years, Kelly has had more than 10 albums go platinum (meaning sales of more than 1 million copies each).
Clearly there’s no shame on the part of the singer or the fans. And so, whether justice will ever be served in a huge question.
Last week, Cook County Circuit Judge Vincent Gaughan delayed the trial, formerly set to start Sept. 17, because the lead prosecutor had given birth the week before. Until now the defense has done a brilliant job of bogging down the system in motions and paperwork, thus postponing the trial.
Meanwhile, the alleged victim, who denies being the minor in the videotape, gets older and older. For some, she’ll come off as a less sympathetic figure.
Meanwhile also, America’s attention span gets shorter and shorter when it comes to news, even the salacious. Shrinking just as fast is our capacity to be shocked by the antics of celebrities.
So that’s where we are and I wonder: What happens now when a parent or adult finds a kid dressed in bling, lip-syncing to a vile song?
Shock and awe? No way. Maybe they’d convene for a great big singalong.
———-