Jump to content
Troy

Bill Withers Documentary

Recommended Posts

Last night I had the pleasure of watching the new Bill Withers Documentary. Afterwards Bill Withers answered questions. If you like Bill's music you like it even more as you discover more about the man. The movie reveals a lot; how Bill only he started performing professional in his 30's, how he suffered from stuttering until his late 20's, it was really quite fascinating.
 

 

51lZcMV5muL.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I heard last night that Bill Withers was known for physcially abusing his ex wife actress Denise Nicholas. The documentary made no reference to those allegations. In fact I don;t recall any mention of Denise Nicholas. While I appreciate Whiter's music the I find the prospect of his beating his wife deeply distrubing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in the day Bill and Denise were a high-profile couple and when they split, it was common knowledge that it was due to spousal abuse on his part!

Your pop culture vulture signing off for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I seem to recall this, but I was too young to appreciate the significance. I posted the same comment on Facebook. One of my buddies accused me of potential slander for making the "unproven statement".

I'm not worried about slander. I did however want to temper my endorsement of the film based upon that new (to me) knowledge about Bill marriage.

Again the film makers did not even mention the "high profile" marriage in the "documentary" of Bill life. That by itself is a glaring ommission. After learning about the abuse in the Denise Nicholas marriage I felt like I was lied to in the documentary.

The issue should have been addressed leaving it out was a mistake in my opinion...

In fact the abusive maariage is a much more plausible explaination of why Bill stopped making records and performing over 20 years ago. This may not be the reason, but it make more sense than what was said in the movie.

I still recommend the movie, but with the reservations I just described.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TROY: "...the film makers did not even mention the "high profile" marriage in the "documentary" of Bill life. That by itself is a glaring ommission. After learning about the abuse in the Denise Nicholas marriage I felt like I was lied to in the documentary.

The issue should have been addressed leaving it out was a mistake in my opinion..."

I disagree.

Bill Withers is one of this country's greatest living songwriters. So I would watch a documentary on him SOLELY for the purposes of observing how he evolved into such a wondrous artist.

I neither know nor even care to know what allegedly went down between him and his current and/or former wives...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TROY: "...the film makers did not even mention the "high profile" marriage in the "documentary" of Bill life. That by itself is a glaring ommission. After learning about the abuse in the Denise Nicholas marriage I felt like I was lied to in the documentary.

The issue should have been addressed leaving it out was a mistake in my opinion..."

I disagree.

Bill Withers is one of this country's greatest living songwriters. So I would watch a documentary on him SOLELY for the purposes of observing how he evolved into such a wondrous artist.

I neither know nor even care to know what allegedly went down between him and his current and/or former wives...

I agree ABM, how would that be a mistake?! Lied to?!

That's akin to a person going to see Michael Jackson's "This is it" and then saying they were lied to because they didn't talk about his drug use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, Michael Jackson's This Is It was not billed as a DOCUMENTARY. It was a extended music video. That was what I expected and that was what was delivered.

Sure, we can disagree about whether one wants to know about Bill's abuse of his wife (and I think we can agree to drop the "alleged"). However, I strongly assert leaving the high profile marriage and abuse out of a documentary of the man's life is horrenous journalism.

It is like watching a documentary of OJ Simpson's life an leaving out the his "allegedly" murdering his wife. Now if someone was to do a flick showing highlihghts of OJ's pro football and movie careed and leave Nicole out that is fine with me. But the murder trail HAS to be in a documentary about OJ's life.

I guess we are all so used to being lied to we don't even notice or give a shit when it happens!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy, your comment is ridiculous. Look>>> "I guess we are all so used to being lied to we don't even notice or give a shit when it happens!" booooooooo!

Excuse me, where is the lie?! You do know what a lie is? So it's a lie if a director leaves out something that YOU think should be included in a documentary? That's nuts Troy.

I am glad you changed you words from "a mistake" to "horrenous journalism". See, as you stated, that's your opinion, but you can not call it a mistake or a lie. Well, you can and you did, so I am glad you game back to clean up that mess.

Bill Wither's vs O.J. Simpson? Come on Troy, Simpson's baggage was world wide news. I doubt a person would say "the abuse Denise" if you asked them to name 5 things associated with Bill Withers. Hell, I didn't know anything about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carey, you are mincing words. The "lie" was one of omission. It is not an opinion but a statement of fact. If you are going to do a documentary of someone's life you can no more leave out the high profile marriage and spousal abuse than you can leave out the high profile murder trial.

Carey your argument is severely flawed. Just because YOU "don't know anything about it" does not mean it is unimportant or should be left out of a documentary. Negro THAT is the POINT of documentaries! To teach you something you don't know.

Now if you are content on watching so called documentaries which leave out material information then you go on. I'll demand something a little more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carey, you are mincing words. The "lie" was one of omission. It is not an opinion but a statement of fact. If you are going to do a documentary of someone's life you can no more leave out the high profile marriage and spousal abuse than you can leave out the high profile murder trial.

Carey your argument is severely flawed. Just because YOU "don't know anything about it" does not mean it is unimportant or should be left out of a documentary. Negro THAT is the POINT of documentaries! To teach you something you don't know.

Now if you are content on watching so called documentaries which leave out material information then you go on. I'll demand something a little more.

Troy, I don't care how you TRY to frame it, it's merely your opinion. Now that's a fact. You thought the information in questions was necessary, but what if someone else thought the same about other little tid bits, huh? If it wasn't there, the producer would be a lying dog, right? Look, lying by omission is knowingly not including something that you obviously are trying to evade. Therefore, since YOU do not know why the producer left it out, you will forever remain wrong in trying to call this a lie by omission. Give up the ghost Troy, tap the mat.

So this is your take on documentaries... "THAT is the POINT of documentaries! To teach you something you don't know". Come on NEGRO, sooooo, you knew everything about Mr. Withers (scars & bruises), but you're crying and calling the producer a lier because it wasn't in this documentary. Make up your mind, you can't have it both ways.

Again, Although you thought his marital affairs are worth talking about, I think millions will disagree with you. That's TMZ's job. But wait, what if there's a documentary about James Brown, should the producer of such included all his marital problems? You know he had a heavy hand, right?

Troy, go find a dictionary and come back and holla! While you're at it, check out lying by omission, google it! You seem to be a little confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that this film should've been specific as to whether it was a look at "Bill Withers, - the man and his music", or "Bill Withers - a life examined". The latter should certainly be a portrait the included "warts" and all. To call attention to the fact that Withers was a stutterer has nothing to do with his music but could've been linked to an inner turmoil that not only showed up in his speech but later in his relationships, taking the form of violence.

A total assessment of Bill Withers has to include his personal life and it is possible to mention his tumultuous relationship with another celebrity without making him a villain, but rather a troubled men. His inner demons may indeed, have been what contributed to his soulful compositions. IMO.

Too often people don't want their heroes to have feet of clay, but nobody is perfect and a man's body of work can be separated from his character flaws. The truth may hurt but it shouldn't be suppressed.

Having one's indiscretions exposed comes with the territory of being famous. Just ask Bill Cosby. Frank Sinatra is never discussed without making mention of his volatile marriage to Ava Garner and Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton's fights were legendary. I could go on and on but - your pop culture vulture is signing off for now. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carey we can't have a serious conversation if you are going to equate Bill's kicking Denise's ass to a "little tid bits". You don't see this as significant. I see it as major. We'll agree to disagree.

I guess you really need to see the movie. They seemingly traced Bills entire life. They visited where he grew up, spoke to childhood friends -- even dug into his ancestry. Bill stuttering (news to me) was a big part of the film. Bill cried over it in the flick. They interviewed Bill's present wife she spoke about how they met. They seemingly have a strong relationship (at least there were no visible bruises unsure.gif ).

One got the sense it was a comprehensive story of the man's life. Again, leaving out the marriage, in this content, was disingenuous at best.

Besides it would have been a better documentary had they included it and explained how he over came being a batterer (assuming he has) -- in the same fashion they explained how he overcame stuttering.

I still love Bill's music. I even appreciate Bill as the complex human being that he is. However I still have a problem with this aspect of the documentary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy,

To what extent is Withers ALLEGED to have abused his ex-wife? Are we talking about a one or two instances? A few? Or was he kicking her tail for years on a daily or weekly basis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABM I would suggest you watch the biography of Bill's life -- oh, wait, my bad they left that part out. Seriously just Google their names or talk to anyone 60 or older.

ABM you know technically OJ "allegedly" decaptiated his wife. Again can we despense with the allegedly please, that is a technical term for courts. Besides it does not really impact my arguement. The FACT that he allegation was commonly known by most people of the era (except Carey) and was so high profile it should have been addressed in the film of his life.

Also, I don't really make a distinction between someone who beat their wife on the regular or that just did it once. The difference between those two individuals is usually one where one wife left after the first beat down and the did not.

Say the song "Who Is He (And What is He to You)?" might help explain the motivation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if any of you are familiar with one of the greatest lyricist to ever inhabit the realm of the "American song book". His name was Johnny Mercer, a good ol boy from Savannah, Georgia, who penned the words to hundreds of songs most of which were popular during the 1940s and 50s, and which continue to dominate the ranks of old standards today. I can't think of any of my favorite love ballads which, when I check, didn't have it words written by Johnny Mercer. Ray Charles recorded quite a few of his songs, as did Ella and Sarah Vaughn and other jazz vocalists.

Anyhow, Johnny Mercer's 100th birthday was recently celebrated by music historians, and his life story was chronicled in a documentary on the TCM cable channel. This was a very in-depth look at his life and times, and included in its details was the affair that this married man carried on with Judy Garland for years. This was something I never knew. It also mentioned that Mercer was what was known as a "mean drunk", a guy who although was very affable when sober, was rude and insulting when intoxicated. Something else I never suspected. :huh:

So, documentaries have been known to spare no details when showcasing the life of a celebrity. Skeletons in the closet are regularly unearthed. :o

Incidentally, Bill Withers and Denise Nicholas' marriage only lasted a little over a year. She didn't waste any time extricating herself from what was rumored to have been a very violent relationship.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprised nobody corrected me when I made reference to Denise "Williams" instead of Denise "Nicholas". I made the correction, myself. Names always vex me. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy,

I recall hearing about Withers committing spousal abuse around the time it was ALLEGED to have occurred. But I am unaware of his ever being tried and convicted of any crimes related to such. So, to ME, WHATEVER happens remains just ALLEGATIONS.

Because UNLIKE with O.J., none of us have witnessed testimony of unexplained injuries, bloody gloves and Italian shoes that link Withers to any crime.

And although I understand and accept the rationale of the social policy and law enforcement related to villainizing ANY instance a man strikes a woman, I disagree that every man who has ever struck a woman in anger is and must be a serial abuser.

Lastly, although I hope that Nicholas has never injured by Withers, I have ZERO interest in the details of what ALLEGEDLY occurred between them. My only interest in ANY documentary of Bill Withers is limited to how he made such wondrous MUSIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABM who said anything about serial abuser?! All I'm saying is that I very seriously doubt, given all of the so called "allegations" that Bill did not hit Denise. I doubt it so much so I'd call it a fact. Now you can give homeboy the benefit of the doubt. But I do not. Just as I do not believe all of Michael Jackson's interactions with young boys were appropriate.

So since you apparently doubt any of the "allegations" are true, you have not interest in them. Since I believe the allegations to be true I feel the completely ignoring the marriage and the so called alleged abuse was a serious omission from a documentary of that man's life.

Besides, even Bill will say that music his not his entire life, so if you only want to watch a documentary of his life that is limited to his "wondrous MUSIC" then you are missing the actually man. It would be like defining you by your wonderous posts on Thumpers corner.

Also "if" Bill hit Denise, even once in anger; then Denise WAS injured emotionally, spirtually and probably physcially. It is a very bad thing for a "man" to hit his wife.

Cynique: Williams, Nicholas, Richards, we knew what you meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy,

I have on several occasions attempted to Google references to Withers (alleged) abuse of Nicholas. And I have found NO detail of what actually happened between them. All I see is Withers being “rumored” to have abused his ex-wife.

You made the comparison with O.J. But the circumstances are totally DIFFERENT. There’s Nicole’s 911 phone call we all WITNESSED. We all WITNESSED the presentation of LOTS of hard and circumstantial evidence presented in court that supports the likelihood O.J. were directly involved in Nicole’s MURDER.

Likewise, with MJ you had a trial, witness testimony, prior settlement(s), etc. that support the likelihood that something that passes the threshold of criminality could have gone down.

But all I have seen in of Withers/Nicholas is he supposedly abused her. I am not aware of any arrest or convictions related to such. I don’t even recall witnessing Nicholas – who is still alive – attesting to the (alleged) abuse.

Moreover, I understand that Withers has been married to his second wife for about THIRTY FIVE years. Has he abused HER? Has she ever declared such? Has his second wife ever had him arrested and charged with spousal abuse?

Did Withers troubles with Nicholas somehow permanent “cure” him of the desire to abuse other women?

Or is it POSSIBLE that what went down between Withers and Nicholas is more COMPLEX than and UNIQUE to THAT particular relationship and situation than it would be to just simply characterize Withers as an abuser?

I have NO problem calling things as they are. But I generally prefer to have SOME support for the existence of a phenomenon BEFORE I am inclined to declare emphatically that it exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man! Talk about beating a dead dog to death! Deconstructing the word "alleged" became the focal point of a discussion replete with a field day for superlative adjectives. Whether or not Bill committed the common act of whippin Denise's ass becomes a "phenomenon". The toe-tappin little ditties composed by Bill became "wondrous". Sheeze! :mellow:

All I gotta say further is that whether he was an abusive husband or not, it's a fact that Bill Withers is in denial about having been married to Denise Nicholas! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I just have issues with the pathological preoccupation of peoples personal lives and not their success or lack of accomplishment in their occupation or craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I seem to recall this, but I was too young to appreciate the significance. I posted the same comment on Facebook. One of my buddies accused me of potential slander for making the "unproven statement".

I'm not worried about slander. I did however want to temper my endorsement of the film based upon that new (to me) knowledge about Bill marriage.

Again the film makers did not even mention the "high profile" marriage in the "documentary" of Bill life. That by itself is………

In fact the abusive maariage is a much more plausible explaination of why Bill stopped making records and performing over 20 years ago. This may not be the reason, but it make more sense than what was said in the movie.

Wow! I’m surprised to hear you say this Troy. There was no real reason to mention this (IMO). The documentary was about his compelling artistry. Attempting to be a revisionist about his past indiscretions serves no real purpose. I see no need to drag the man’s personal life into a celebration of his art. Do not misunderstand me -I do not endorse nor condone spousal abuse. I think men who beat or physically assualt women are cowards. But I have issues with Americas putrid tabloid culture of sensationalism and venomous gossip about peoples personal lives (e.g. Tiger Woods).

Some of the worlds greatest artists were abusive towards women (Diego Rivera, Miles Davis, Pablo Picasso, Billy Eckstine, Frank Lloyd Wright, et al). But their lack of civility in their personal relationships in no way diminishes their artistic accomplishments. It’s like Pete Rose and gambling. Yeah, he was naughty but he was one of the games greatest base ball players. Banning him from the hall of fame was bullshit. Attempting to enforce a litmus test of piety, incorruptable morality or spousal faithfulness serves no real purpose when assessing ones artistic accomplishments or creativity. Two different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since I prefer to think of my interest in the lives of the rich and famous as "curiosity" rather than "pathelogical" a term Xeon plays fast and loose with, I will ignore his patting himself on the back for wearing blinders.

Considering how Withers' long marriage to his present wife was mentioned in this documentary, the door was open to examining his personal life, and the fact that his first marriage to Denise Nicholas is ignored is not only dishonest, but bad journalism.

Certain things come with the territory of being a star. Everything unfavorable that the public knows about celebrities has been revealed in documentaries and bios but there are apparently those who take pride in sticking their heads in the sand when it comes to the truth, preferring to think of themselves as purists who only care about art. Puleeze. Any broad-minded person knows that having talent is not synonymous with being angelic, and people like myself can handle the duality of genius. Others prefer to sweep the truth under the rug. So be it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bunnie0203

First, Michael Jackson's This Is It was not billed as a DOCUMENTARY. It was a extended music video. That was what I expected and that was what was delivered.

Sure, we can disagree about whether one wants to know about Bill's abuse of his wife (and I think we can agree to drop the "alleged"). However, I strongly assert leaving the high profile marriage and abuse out of a documentary of the man's life is horrenous journalism.

It is like watching a documentary of OJ Simpson's life an leaving out the his "allegedly" murdering his wife. Now if someone was to do a flick showing highlihghts of OJ's pro football and movie careed and leave Nicole out that is fine with me. But the murder trail HAS to be in a documentary about OJ's life.

I guess we are all so used to being lied to we don't even notice or give a shit when it happens!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bunnie0203

Why is it important after 20 plus year to bring up this man's past? I would hope that he has made amends with those he may have hurt. Why do we want to continue to punish people for their past sins. We are not God and should not judge. Is it really your business wheather he abused his ex-wife or do you like his music? As anyone who listens to music can see he has remained out of the picture when it comes to music. Denise has gone on with her career. Why not leave the ugly truth behind. Enjoy his music if it pleases you and watch re-runs of In The Heat Of The Night I'm quite sure that Bill nor Denise want to rehash what happened 20 yrs. ago. I'm also sure the movie/doc. included all aspects of his life. Also, 20n yrs. ago it was alright to abuse whoever and whatever you wanted. Not saying that abuse is or was the correct way to handle a situation. Back in the day it was one of man's ills, just like discipline is now considered abuse. Check out some states blue laws. In North Carolina, it was against the law to beat your wife on a Sunday. Times change so, forgive him of his past misconduct. Be careful in what you do because 20 yrs. frfom now someone might be writing about you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it important after 20 plus year to bring up this man's past? I would hope that he has made amends with those he may have hurt. Why do we want to continue to punish people for their past sins. We are not God and should not judge. Is it really your business wheather he abused his ex-wife or do you like his music? As anyone who listens to music can see he has remained out of the picture when it comes to music. Denise has gone on with her career. Why not leave the ugly truth behind. Enjoy his music if it pleases you and watch re-runs of In The Heat Of The Night I'm quite sure that Bill nor Denise want to rehash what happened 20 yrs. ago. I'm also sure the movie/doc. included all aspects of his life. Also, 20n yrs. ago it was alright to abuse whoever and whatever you wanted. Not saying that abuse is or was the correct way to handle a situation. Back in the day it was one of man's ills, just like discipline is now considered abuse. Check out some states blue laws. In North Carolina, it was against the law to beat your wife on a Sunday. Times change so, forgive him of his past misconduct. Be careful in what you do because 20 yrs. frfom now someone might be writing about you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe some of the things you said in your post, bunnie. In the first place, that "20 year" figure you randomly threw out there in an effort to dismiss the current disapproval of spousal abuse doesn't neutralize the issue. 20 years ago was 1990 and back then beating your wife was not something that was excused.

You further seem to be saying that any abuse that occured during Bill and Denises' marriage, which was more like 35 years ago, was no big deal because it used to be was considered OK to beat up your wife. Oh really?

You also make the statement that you're sure the documentary included what happened between Denise and Bill. But Troy, who saw the documentary, said this was not the case. That's what this whole post is all about!

Like the others, you don't want to rock the boat. You want to silence those who raise legitimate concerns, because you apparently believe that ignoring the truth will make it go away. Puleeze.

Certain of you keep saying that you don't care about his personal life because you like Withers' music. Me, I like his music, too, even as I recall that contrary to what the documentary wants viewers to believe, he was once married to Denise Nicholas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok ABM, I'll conceed that there was no court trial (that I know of) which presented evidence and sworn testimony regarding the beat downs of Denise and on that basis are different.

Again, I'm not saying Bill did not change his ways (we don't know). All I saying is that leaving the marriage to Denise and the abuse out of the documentary, given everything esle that was covered, was a mistake and very telling.

Again, I saw Michael Jackson's this is it were there was EVIDENCE about his bad behavior with little biys. However I had NO problem with the film because it was a film about his final concernt, and it was positioned as such.

Now if they do a documentary about his LIFE and leave out the problems with little boys I would have a problem with such a documenatry.

I guess ABM, you would be happy with Jackson 5 video clips, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since I prefer to think of my interest in the lives of the rich and famous as "curiosity" rather than "pathelogical" a term Xeon plays fast and loose with, I will ignore his patting himself on the back for wearing blinders
.

Has nothing to do with blinders. If you are curious about celebrities personal lives, fine. But my comment about the general publics seemingly pathological obsession with so-called famous peoples personal lives still stands. Just witness the countless simple-minded tabloids at the grocery store that have created an industry about the most personal and tragic details of peoples intimate lives. Tiger Woods it s perfect example. You cannot turn on the TV without seeing or hearing an up to date daily report about what he is doing, where he is going, his wife, his kids, What he is wearing, what he had for breakfast, etc, etc….. It’s pathetic…..!!!!!

Considering how Withers' long marriage to his present wife was mentioned in this documentary, the door was open to examining his personal life, and the fact that his first marriage to Denise Nicholas is ignored is not only dishonest, but bad journalism.

So you say. But once again, I could care less. But that is not the same as saying it should be omitted. You seem to suggest this. My point was very basic: “The personal lives of so-called famous people should not overshadow their creativity or accomplishments". They are two separate things. Troy stated he had reservations about Withers after learning of his personal life. I was addressing this my dear –not that an individuals personal lives should be censored or ignored. For those who have the need to know all the minutia about an individuals indiscretions and details of such, have at it…..

Certain things come with the territory of being a star. Everything unfavorable that the public knows about celebrities has been revealed in documentaries and bios…..

As it should be. You seem confused about my position. I never suggested unfavorable or negative aspects of an individuals life should be censored or omitted. Once again, I said it should not overshadow nor diminish their achievements. Their personal lives should not be a litmus test for acceptance or evaluation of their artistry. THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS. And I said that I personally could care less about their behavior behind closed doors. I never said everyone else should feel as I do....

….but there are apparently those who take pride in sticking their heads in the sand when it comes to the truth, preferring to think of themselves as purists who only care about art.

Really? Ok…..Well….I wouldn’t know anything about that. But if you say so……

Puleeze. Any broad-minded person knows that having talent is not synonymous with being angelic, and people like myself can handle the duality of genius.

I guess…..But unfortunately, the popularity of the relentless paparazzi intrusions and harassment has transformed our society into one of voyeuristic zombies. Fact not fiction….

Others prefer to sweep the truth under the rug. So be it.

Unfortunately, that is true. Personally, sweeping the truth and facts under a rug is something I have always had an aversion for. We got enough of that with eight years of the past presidential administration……

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Withers' music always gave me the impression he was a gentle "for the people," "all about love" type person. I don't know the details of his relationship with Denise, but anyone who abuses a woman probably doesn't have respect for females as a whole. I have a problem with that and putting that type of individual on a pedestal. You can't disrespect me or my gender for having weaker muscles and get my loyalty in some fan club.

I'm reading Pearl Cleage’s book "Mad at Miles." The title came about because she stumbled across a Miles Davis interview where he bragged about slapping Cicely Tyson in the mouth and how she was afraid of him when they were married. Wasn’t the first time I heard it, but I was shocked when I did. Miles has always been touted in the black community and among jazz fans as if he was some “musical genius/hero.” I was shocked and offended that he found it comical to abuse a woman, and that his behavior seemed to be a well kept secret. My feel is if Miles doesn’t respect women, he gets no loyalty from me as a fan…I give credit where it’s due in him being a musician, but you will not hear me giving him accolades.

I agree with Troy. If you're doing a bio on someone give me the good and bad so I can know who I'm fooling with. Pearl Cleage's book goes on to say how Bill Withers abused Denise Nicholas, David Ruffin abused Tammi Terrell, etc…Not to separate us as a people, but to ask the question: How can they hit us and still be our leaders, lovers, geniuses, and husbands? [James Brown should be added to the list for being both an activist AND abusing women].

To make good choices you have to know what you’re dealing with. Anything less slants reality.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice that while our "monitor" Carey was advising Dee about the credibility of Obama's critics, he didn't have anything to say about her comments in regard to Bill Withers' talent not excusing his history of wife abuse. That's because Dee remarks didn't jibe with Carey's opinions on this subject. Typical of Carey's stance on issues: You agree with him, you're acceptable; if you don't, you're glossed over. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the pleasure of seeing the documentary a few weeks ago. I really enjoyed. Back in the day I "heard" he was physically abusive toward Denise Nicholas. I noticed that any mention of that aspect of his life was conspicuously missing from the documentary.

However, I'm not surprised by that. If he was abusive, Bill Withers strikes me as the kind of guy who has put that behind him, and I doubt that that was a topic he wanted to revisit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MissRMP, I hear you. Initially, and before I was reminded about Bill's abuse of Denise, I was raving about the film. I came away really admiring Bill. We are all human and make mistakes Bill is not different.

However, I hold a special kind of animosity for those that abuse people weaker than themselves -- especially men who abuse women or children. Some abusers are the most charismatic people you'd ever want to meet.

At the end of the day, I don't know BIll. I just felt slighted by a documentary that presumably revealed so much but clearly hid much more. It might have been a better documentary if he discussed that very public chapter of his life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This re-run was also interesting because of what is happening today in regard to high profile black males and domestic abuse.  It reinforces the claim about how it has always gone on but has been ignored or concealed because of the threat it represented to  the careers of celebs.  It also raises the issue of separating a person's talent from their flaws, and whether the public has a right to pass judgment on a celeb's private life. To me, being famous doesn't make you immune from criticism, and intrusion into one's private life comes with the territory of seeking fame.

 

In the case of Bill Withers, his wife Denise Nicholas had a problem with what was going on in their marriage and she promptly divorced his "talented" ass.  I stand by my position that nothing detracts from the fact that there were widely-circulated rumors that Bill Withers was beating up Denise Nichols during their marriage, and her leaving him gave credence to such rumors. Withers and his apologists are simply in denial.  

 

Contributors to this thread like Carey, ABM and Xeon advancing their rationales and specious arguments revealed where their priorities lie when it comes to domestic abuse.

 

In regard to the complaints raised about people who dote on the affairs of celebrities, I say this:  As someone who strives to be conversant on a broad range of topics because this makes me a more interesting person, I do keep up with what's going on in pop culture; not because I am a fan of its vapidness but because staying current on what's going on with these cardboard figures gives me material to use when ridiculing them during discussions I am  informed enough to participate in. 

 

 Elitists who restrict their awareness of what's going on in the world at large can be bores who take themselves too seriously. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elitists who restrict their awareness of what's going on in the world at large can be bores who take themselves too seriously.  

 

Cynique, again you are probably right.  

 

However I find that if the celebrity in question is someone I have no interest in, like a Kardasian, or the kids on The Jersey Shore (anyone on reality TV really), I find that boring.  Keeping up with their antics would be a chore for me.  If I risk coming across as elitist then...  But the fact that I know Snookie had a child is troublesome to me.  This "information" is hard to avoid.

 

My sharing of Dee's comments on social media got a lot of attention.  It seemed to hit a nerve for the reasons you suggested Cynique.

 

I would suggest however that fame does make you immune to criticism.  Well maybe not the critique but certainly the repercussions in many cases--especially if you are white.

 

Bill Clinton can get busted getting head in the Oval Office and he is still well respected.  Can you consider how Barack would be treated under similar conditions especially-if Bill had not set the precedent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My little dig about elitism wasn't directed at you specifically, Troy.  It was inspired by Xeon's rant.  It's all about balance.  It never hurts to know a little bit about a lot of things. IMO.  (BTW, there is someone named Richard who has been posting here lately.)

 

As to whether famous people should be considered immune to criticism, they act as though this should be the case  They want adulation but can't deal with the slings and arrows that come with having their dirty laundry aired.  Celebs don't even seem to be placated when the public likes them in spite of their indiscretions.  They want people to have short memories and to only view them in a favorable light.  No matter how popular Clinton remains, he still wants his affair swept under the rug.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Regarding Bil WIthers

Some people bring out the worst in each other.

Withers will forever be judged for beating Denise Nichols even though they were only married for one year out of his 70 plus years on this earth. We know the abuse occurred because Denise Nichols had Jet magazine take pictures of her black eyes.

But, after Denise, Withers got remarried to a woman who he has been married to now for 3 or 4 decades with no further reports of spousal abuse. They have two children who have never said a bad word against their dad. Denise, on the other hand, got married one more time, to a football player, got divorced, and has never been married again.

Withers is not a wife beater. He _was_ a Denise Nichols beater. They never should have gotten married, obviously. Once he and she broke up, he seems to have resumed being a decent dude. I am not defending his beating Denise Nichols. He should have had enough sense to walk, not run, away from that woman after the first time she ticked him off rather than putting his hands on her. But the sad truth is that there are some women who will keep pushing a man until he pushes back. Maybe Denise is, or at least was, one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×