Woman is the nigger of the world

44 Responses

  1. Ronald says:

    So Universal is against women’s rights, are they? They also believe in censorship. A sort of Hays Code for the 21st century, except everything in that code is now allowed.

  2. Stoneburner says:

    Excluded so as to appease folks who wouldn’t buy or listen to it anyway but are “triggered” by a fact that some such thing exists anywhere in any universe .

  3. mpb says:

    yes the lyric is problematic and always has been. but considering how clever Lennon’s estate is i’m surprised not to see more finesse in their approach.
    for example, why not :
    include the track, but bleep the offending word?
    substitute their catchy “2 minutes silence” for the offending track?
    market a glow in the dark EP with all the excised versions on the tetragrammaton label?
    substitute “ultimate collection” or “full concert” or “5x grammy” or “move magic” for the offending word?
    or maybe just slot it in as an easter egg on the blu-ray?

  4. Robert says:

    Even now this song is misunderstood. Yoko is not well & John would have included it. As the song has been in circulation for 53 years,
    Would it be more controversial now than back then to be included.
    See mean Mr Mayo on YouTube. Also odd Sisters Oh Sisters not on live concerts but other recordings of this song are.
    The box set apart from ommited songs is fantastic.
    It would have been nice to see One To One rehearsals included.
    It’s Only Make Believe for example. Certainly more Content than on George,s last set with only 2 extra tracks for deluxe box set,
    Duplicated for cd & Vinyl.
    Anyway hope everyone enjoys this on release.

  5. John Kaelin says:

    I am guessing the song may be included as a hidden track or perhaps released on an exclusive CD as part of a magazine release such as the Uncut Mind Games disc, which is excellent.

    I totally understand why it’s not there. The fake outrage crowd and fake news media would solely focus on the song. Nothing else would be discussed. It would unfortunately not only affect John but it could affect the others and the group as a whole as the ignorance out there is overwhelming. Sad but that’s reality.

  6. Robert Wright says:

    While I agree with John,s last comment about hidden track. Plus on a cd from Uncut, they would get it in the neck also. Totally agree with everyone else who has made comments. As I add to my earlier comment here, John,s music should not be dictated too by the woke brigade. There would be more people who like Lennon would rather have this song included than not. If the n word is on a rap song nothing is said. Sean Lennon is thinking too of his mothers health. I,m sure this was considered for omission.

    • admin says:

      The estate is aware of the speculations in social media from fans that the offending song might be a hidden track, so they have added – after the tracklisting on johnlennon.com – this statement: NB – This is the full track listing. There are no hidden tracks on the CDs or Blu-Rays.

  7. Paul Murphy says:

    I’ve been saying for decades – not that my voice is of any relevence or resonance – they should simply have swapped. Yoko sing ‘Woman Is’ and John sing ‘Sisters.

    I’m sure many people will point out the dichotomy of there being no qualms [“Qualms! Qualms for the poor!”] with the remaining included STINYC songs being co-produced by the wife-beating, woman-murdering Phil Spector.

    • Erik Meberg says:

      That is brilliant! That really would have been the most thoughtful, convincing, effective and socially acceptable way to convey the truly powerful message they wanted to get across. The dynamics of the presentation always struck a sour note with me, though I think it’s some of his best pure singing since This Boy.

  8. Kevin says:

    Dick Cavett said it best, why can’t we all be adults here and cut out the censorship of art?

  9. Robert Wildermuth says:

    While I don’t approve of the censorship of “history”, I will not miss this track. In my lowly, unprofessional opinion, this song is borderline unlistenable compared to John’s other work (even in the protest/topical context of the album).

  10. Paul Murphy says:

    It’s now been (mostly reliably) confirmed that the Estate wanted ‘Woman’ on in 2022, and it was nixed on instruction ‘from the legal department’. If so, that augers bad for the existence of the song anywhere from now on. The train of thought seemingly is that it is now placing a hate-word into the public arena. There’s some validity in this – although, a] what did it cost in legal fees to come to that decision and b] what, you never foresaw that before making the box?

    What also seems to have missed all these high-thoughters, is that, on or off, the omission decision is going to cause publicity… for the song.

    Where there is a counter-arguement, and I’m not seeing this on any of the forums currently mid-froth about this, is that John, and Yoko, whose phrase it was, were clearly, unequivocably, using the word as an alignment, a comparision, not as a hate-directive. It’s not, “You’re a dirty….” it’s “you’re treating the females of society/your relationship with the derision and debasement of those times and mindsets.” I still personally would not agree with that – the extent is too deep. Woman was certainly the less significant other, in Western societies… at that time. That doesn’t scan too well though. Actually, if you take out the other people’s quotes – “Woman is the…” and “the slave to the slave…” – there’s not much of John in there, and what there is doesn’t equate. ‘You insult her every night on TV’? Really? Maybe John didn’t realise that Lucy had all the power in ‘I love Lucy’.

    What can be said for certain is that the set is now out, and on all factors – principle, cost and content – I wouldn’t buy it. All those 58-second jam snippets again, a la “Plastic” Super Deluxe? It’s a lot of money for one listen only.

    Couple of final thoughts:

    The song is looked at through a Western perspective. It would be interesting to know what the ladies of Afghanistan would say on the matter. One might posit that they would be in agreement with Yoko.

    And – revise of censor? Would it have been so bad, if Sean had overdubbed the word “figure”?; post MeToo, and given that, Christ aside, most of the major works of art are of females [Mona Lisa, Ophelia, Lady of Shallott, Virgin Mary, Whistler’s Mother, any number of Dali’s, Venus, Aphrodite, Juliet… soooo many etc’s], t’would work well, albeit one needs to sing an unpresent “but” at the start of some lines.

    • Stoneburner says:

      Bit of a daft idea that, but I’ve got a daft idea of my own – why not remove John’s vocal and include it as an instrumental backing track? Or would the fact that one could sing a long with it still bring the easily triggered out in a rash….

      • Paul Murphy says:

        What, you think if John was still alive, or had toured through the 80s, he wouldn’t have updated the lyric tot his, it being both passe by then, and not very accurate in the first place? Dylan is forever refining his lyrics, to make them relevant to the day, not to the then, ‘Tangled Up In Blue’, ‘Gotta Serve Somebody’ etc.

        • Stoneburner says:

          I have absolutely no idea what John would have thought if he were still alive , no more than you do for that matter .

          • Paul Murphy says:

            I suggest that you read the actual wordings of questions, before you flail about trying to make snide remarks to bolster your lack of self worth.

      • Paul Murphy says:

        I wake every morning a happy man knowing that I live rent-free inside your head. I reckon I could even charge you for my being there and you’d pay.

        • Stoneburner says:

          If I had to have a weirdo like you in my head I’d blow my own brains out, or else watch one of your terrible “just for men” hair dye sponsored music videos, which is much the same experience.

    • Rob Geurtsen says:

      Spot on and brilliant observation:
      “The song is looked at through a Western perspective. It would be interesting to know what the ladies of Afghanistan would say on the matter. One might posit that they would be in agreement with Yoko.”

    • Rickenbacker620 says:

      What about rap music that uses this word indiscriminately throughout just about every song?

  11. Artie Lee says:

    As a longtime Lennon fan I will pass on this. A poor album needlessly given super deluxe, extended treatment. The live concert is the selling point but I have the older versions and they will do. I understand about the missing track, thought it a mistake at the time. My grandchildren were horrified when I showed them the old vinyl with the track listed.
    Hopefully “Walls and Bridges” will follow but perhaps May will be removed from that!

  12. Fokke says:

    WITNOTW and Sisters, O Sisters (studio and live versions) would make an excellent release on Sean’s own Chimera Music label. But this will not happen.

  13. Michael B. says:

    this is really nonsense.. how can they make such a big re release, remix, remaster excluding a so much important song??… perhaps the best song from the STINYC album and one of the best performance of the concert! really a big mistake.. what are they thinking? we won’t notice that there’s a missing song? can’t believe it

  14. Michael Hockinson says:

    Are we certain “Woman” has been excised, or could they possibly be hidden tracks?

  15. Fernando Camargo Pérez says:

    ¿Universal dobló a Sean y a Yoko Ono excluyendo ‘Woman is the nigger of the world de este nuevo paquete? ¿Valía la pena censurar la canción de John a cambio de una posición relativamente correcta y, al mismo tiempo llenarse los bolsillos de dinero?
    ¿A que nos lleva la mutilación esta creación en el álbum? En el fondo censura la obra completa de John ya que cuestiona su legado histórico al poder decidir qué canción puede o no ser publicada de nuevo, máxime cuando ya está reconocida. Es cuestionar la rebeldía de John que apoyó, en su momento, el punto de vista de Yoko. Es la primera vez que se prohíbe la publicación de una canción ya conocida de John
    ¿Qué pasa NY? ¿Qué pasa en el mundo? La inquisición renace con un Sean y Yoko que no quieren defender la obra. No hay nada que los disculpe. En un mundo en que se alza la violencia psicológica y física, Sean y Yoko se alinean a esta posición. ¿No entienden el valor de defender las ideas? ¿No entienden el significado que tenía la canción en el florecimiento del feminismo a principios de los setenta del siglo pasado? ¿Esto fortalece la posición actual del feminismo? No lo creo.
    ¿Power to de People? Lo dudo. Protesto por la censura a ‘Woman is the nigger of the World’.

  16. William Campbell says:

    I guess money is still the most important thing to Yoko.

    • Paul Murphy says:

      I doubt there will be much money from this. The production costs will have been very high, the Super Deluxe is too large to appeal to the casual observer, there is no video content – the concert films are not out until next year – and long-time fans, whether they like the song or not, are baulking at its exclusion, which is effectively telling them “You have been wrong/racists all these years.”

    • Tom says:

      Yoko has next to nothing to do with the re-releases for the last few years, she’s very ill

  17. Erik A says:

    I consider myself a liberal. But I vehemently oppose censorship.
    AND THIS IS THE DUMBEST CENSORSHIP I HAVE EVER SEEN.
    I have rarely been more excited for an archive release…I’ve waited YEARS for these concerts complete and in HD quality. And because of this ridiculous, short-signed decision, I will not be buying this set. Watch the 2010 LENNON NYC doc…it presents a perfect argument for allowing the song. Has society changed so much in 15 years that people cannot even have a conversation anymore? The blasted word is being used a million times more by not including the song than if it were included. The song was considered releasable on the 2005 remix CD. The song was endorsed by the NAACP back in the day. Only a moron would think that Lennon was making a racist statement in the song.
    But now…people are so afraid of offending, even if it’s irrational…so they bypass the conversation and simply erase history.
    They should release the album Lennon wanted to release in 1972. They should release the concerts Lennon wanted to perform in 1972.
    I wanted to buy the Super Deluxe set…but I will NOT be buying it now. And I’ve personally spoken to at least 7 other fans who wanted to buy it but will absolutely not buy it now.

    • admin says:

      Once again, they are plying into the bootleggers hands. No doubt both shows will be reproduced on bootleg DVDs and Blu-rays with WITNOTW and SOS reinserted in their proper places. Shame that we didn’t get to hear them in the new remix, though.

  18. Erik A says:

    One more thing…the problem is making a statement that a song was okay for one time but cannot be heard today. Lennon was, by this point, a protest artist. He wanted to raise a stink. It was a huge part of his philosophy.
    The truth is: it is the best song on the album by far. And I’ve seen the old version of the show on YouTube. It was one of the best-performed songs at the concerts.
    If people don’t understand why it’s wrong, they should ask themselves if it wouldn’t be insane to release a new version of PLASTIC ONO BAND without, say, WORKING CLASS HERO. No, this would not happen…but would it not be ridiculous? What if Paul told Universal that his feelings were really hurt by HOW DO YOU SLEEP and they removed it from IMAGINE so as not to hurt his feelings?
    Again, this would never happen. But the whole idea is similar to publicly showing an important painting (a work of art) but covering a portion of the painting with a black square because it has an offending image.
    How would that make the artist feel?

  19. Rickenbacker620 says:

    Say it and continue to say the title of that song…Woman is the Nigger of the World…. Sorry if any blue haired pronoun types are offended. This song was real and it’s very much a part of the history of that time. Stop pretending it never existed. Lame is the word

  20. cmac says:

    It’s sad that as far as somethings have progressed in the 50+ years since this song came out that we are still scared of words. I’m all for not platforming hate speech and encouraging the objectification of women…but that’s the point of this song. To use controversial language to get attention and highlight an overlooked issue in society at the time (sadly still an issue today). To just cut it in order to not offend misses the point of why it was written and why the word was used in the first place. That’s just my opinion.

  21. Erik says:

    The only people who would buy this set would be hardcore Lennon/Beatle fans. Most people buying this set already have STINYC 1 or 2 times already (maybe more)…most people who buy this set would have watched LENNON NYC, LENNON ON DICK CAVETT…or any other documentary featuring the song being explained/performed.

    Anyone can listen to the song on YouTube right now!

    Anyone can listen to the song on Spotify right now!

    The song was Lennon’s only single of 1972. He included it in his first “Best Of” album, SHAVED FISH.

    The song was on the 2005 remix CD. It was in the 2010 box set. The only people who would care about this song either being kept or removed are people who have already heard this song a ton of times and possibly already own it.

    Would Beatle fans be happy with a new “1965” box set that includes every song on RUBBER SOUL except RUN FOR YOUR LIFE, the excuse being that the set is “a compilation”?

    Technically, I can put the new “Ultimate” version of STINYC on my iTunes by including the 2005 mix (I like the 2000s mixes more than the new ones, anyway).

    But what really is unforgiveable is that this set will have a book discussing the period and pretend John didn’t write the song…didn’t perform it on T.V. shows…

    And worse: these are supposed to be the COMPLETE Madison Square Garden shows. But, as was pointed out before, fans are going to have to wait for bootleg Blu-Rays to watch the “complete” show.

    Including the song in this set would not even make the news. It’s a nothing story. But…NOT including it is serving to do nothing more than have less fans buy the set and have fans lose complete respect for the current John Lennon Estate.

    It might be too late…but I hope they fix this. Maybe fans can start a petition or something.

  22. Glenn Milam says:

    The song was supposed to be offensive. That’s the point!

  23. Krist Delgado says:

    The Anthology Series is coming!!! Look at The official Beatles YouTube Channel!!!

    • Erik A says:

      I know I’m going to sound like a jerk (I’m actually really excited about ANTHOLOGY being re-released!)…but I bet they calculatedly announced this Lennon set so soon before announcing ANTHOLOGY because it would change the conversation of the cancelled song. I have never seen so many Lennon fans upset with the Estate like this.

      Oh, well. I’ll buy ANTHOLOGY, at least.

  24. Robert says:

    Totally agree with rickenbacker620. Plus everyone else up in arms about woman is the(bleep for offended people] of the world. As in cinema & rap it’s used. Does seem strange for a hybrid disc 1. Also if artificial intelligence can upgrade sound for afternoon show.
    Why not include one to one rehearsals? Mean Mr Mayo on you tube heard left out for poor sound quality. I,m sure Peter Jackson would not have a problem with this.
    As Anthology 1 2 3 4 is counting down on Beatles website. We can all speculate on what will be in. But if Tie Me Kangaroo Down Sport is included. I will be very surprised,

  25. Blakey says:

    Amazing. A profound piece by John and Yoko is banned and buried. Yet numerous rap types who glorify guns, violence and misogyny say that word with impunity.

  26. mpb says:

    more adulteration in the latest Lennon offering : some of his shouty vocals have been pitch-corrected.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0uidknVYic
    (not the first time? i remember reading that Let It Be Naked employed this on a spot or 2.)

  27. Michael B. says:

    after nearly a month of these news, i’d like to add some things:
    I think the decision was made because of the streaming algorithms which are set to ban, not allow, skip or not show stuff with certain words. I think that’s the main reason of this censorship, more than to avoid scandal on media.
    The second thing is that I have watched a lot of beatles related youtubers showing their Lennon One To One box sets, gifted to them by Universal, and of course, they are not saying anything against this box set.
    And one last thing: it’s really a shame that nobody from the label or the Lennon estate has said anything about the censorship made to the songs

Leave a Reply