SATB Special: Power To WHAT People? - Canceling Lennon in 2025 with Candy Leonard

Summary

Podcast Summary

Podcast: Something About the Beatles
Host: Robert Rodriguez (Evergreen Podcasts)
Episode: SATB Special: Power To WHAT People? - Canceling Lennon in 2025 with Candy Leonard
Date: August 30, 2025
Guest: Candy Leonard (author of Beatleness)

---

Overview

This SATB special examines the recent controversy in the Beatles world over the omission of John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s “Woman Is the Nigger of the World” from the newly announced “Power to the People: John and Yoko” deluxe set. Host Robert Rodriguez is joined by sociologist and Beatles scholar Candy Leonard to analyze the implications of this decision, its intersection with cancel culture, changing social sensibilities, gender and race politics, artistic legacy, and the continuing relevance and discomfort sparked by Lennon’s most politically charged works.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. The New Beatles/Lenonn-Ono Releases and the Omission

• A major new John & Yoko box set is announced, intended to highlight their political activism, but it conspicuously leaves out "Woman Is the Nigger of the World," igniting debate (02:00).
• The Anthology project's paperback and Anthology 4 also announced, but the main focus is on the glaring song omission.

2. Why Was the Song Omitted?

• The host and guest assume (with some industry insight) that fear of backlash over the song’s title, particularly the “N-word,” drove the omission (04:01, 08:08).
• Quote: "We are assuming... the decision to leave it off the new compilation is based on the fact that that word is offensive." — Candy Leonard (04:01)
• Considerations of offense focused more on Black audiences, but Rodriguez notes there has been no clear, vocal outrage from the Black community about this song.
• Counterpoint: Could this also be about discomfort with the song’s strong feminist message? (08:08)
• Corporations (labels, Disney) likely acting from risk aversion, not interest in fostering dialogue. "Record companies and corporations generally... They're here to make money. They're not here to get political change the world." — Rodriguez (10:14)

3. Context and Evolution: Then vs. Now

• The song was considered controversial even in 1972, but Lennon actively sought approval/explanation (e.g., the Dick Cavett show, Jet Magazine) and made the contextual intent clear. (08:40)
• Quote: "John took great pains to do [this] in 1972... to explain it, get their tacit, if not explicit approval." — Host (08:40)
• Now, in 2025, the song’s discussion is blurred by “instant judgment, super short attention spans,” and online cancellation culture (08:40).

4. Feminist and Artistic Importance

• Leonard argues omission “silences and disappears” Lennon’s evolution as a feminist, which is particularly meaningful given modern criticism of his past behavior (07:10).
• The song’s message and relevance have only grown with current regressive politics (14:46).
• Quote: "Musically, it's just phenomenal. The vocal is magnificent." — Leonard (12:08)
• Irony in dropping the most musically and thematically resonant song from a set about John & Yoko’s political years.

5. Intersectionality & Who Speaks?

• The conversation touches on why women’s voices are sought for commentary, and why intersectional perspectives (e.g., Black women) are often not foregrounded (03:16-04:39).
• Discussion of how issues of race, sex, and who "owns" offense become muddied in cancel debates.

6. Who Is Responsible for Such Decisions?

• Questions about the role of boardrooms (likely male-dominated), legal fears, and Sean Lennon’s personal complicity/acquiescence in the omission (09:39–11:16).
• Debate over Sean’s silence or potential justification. "It does seem like a betrayal... there's historic precedent..." — Host (15:11)

7. Historic and Cultural Echoes

• The guest connects the song’s theme to Lola Young’s contemporary hit “Messy,” underlining the persistence of cultural expectations and double standards for women (22:08–23:29).
• Parallel drawn to other artists (Patti Smith, Nina Simone) who have repurposed controversial language or pushed boundaries with intent for social good (20:09, 28:21).

8. Censorship, Artistic Integrity, and Precedent

• Comparison to other cases of censorship or self-censorship in rock (e.g., Rolling Stones' “Brown Sugar,” Blind Faith cover, Led Zeppelin’s Houses of the Holy) (35:45–36:49).
• Reflection on how attitudes to content change over time; challenge of judging past behavior/art by current standards (36:23–39:06).
• The “Disneyfication” of the Beatles and the drive for sanitized, risk-free mass appeal (33:10–33:26).

9. Critical Moments and Solutions Missed

• Suggestion: Could controversial songs be released with wise contextualizing notes or endorsements by respected public figures (Whoopi Goldberg, Questlove)? (67:41)
• Missed opportunity for a “teachable moment." "Why couldn't Sean have written a few paragraphs... putting this in its historical context?" — Leonard (67:22)

10. Legacy, Cancel Culture, and the Beatles’ Historical Role

• The Beatles as historical change agents, reflecting and influencing social progress—for omission to erase evidence of Lennon’s evolution does violence to history (17:52).
• The danger of evaluating legacy only by moments of imprudence, rather than growth. "He was a guy that moved beyond that... in the end, give him a little bit of credibility for wanting to change in a positive direction." — Host (61:52).

11. Contemporary Relevance of the Message

• Ongoing gender inequality, setbacks in women’s rights, and misogyny show how little things have changed (13:08).
• Speculation: if "Woman Is the Nigger of the World" were covered by modern artists (Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Lola Young), would it change the debate? Might it become palatable? (27:13–27:49)
• Call for courage in addressing history and respecting uncomfortable, important art.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the purpose of omission:
  "We're assuming that they took it out because they were afraid of getting some backlash about the use of that word. Now, it may also be that they didn't like the feminist message." — Candy Leonard (08:08)

• On teachable moments:
  "Rather than looking at this as a teachable moment... as John took great pains to do in 1972... they didn't want to deal with any of that." — Host (08:40)

• On artistic legacy:
  "It's really an insult to him. It's an insult to both of them, but it's really... It's really an insult to the whole historical record of the 60s in a way." — Candy Leonard (18:53)

• On Lennon’s evolution:
  "It's silencing and it's disappearing his evolution as a man and as a feminist. And that's what makes it wrong." — Candy Leonard (07:10)

• On missed possibilities:
  "Surely Sean could have done a 2025 equivalent… Maybe bring... in just as John 50 years ago went to Jet magazine and the head of the Black Caucus, Ron Dellums, vouched for this." — Leonard (13:08)

• On relevance of the song:
  "This is the evergreen. This is the song that is just as relevant today." — Host (05:12)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 02:00 – Introduction of the Power to the People box, context for its release
• 04:00–07:40 – Reasoning and speculation for omission, intersectionality
• 08:08–10:14 – Risk aversion, fear of offense, corporate culture
• 12:08–15:11 – Musical and feminist importance of the song, John Lennon’s growth
• 22:08–23:36 – Parallels with Lola Young’s “Messy,” persistence of societal judgment
• 27:13–28:21 – Speculation on covers by modern female artists
• 33:10–33:26 – The “Disneyfication” of the Beatles
• 36:23–39:06 – Historical change in sensibility; censorship and overcorrection
• 41:20–44:49 – Album artwork, male gaze, and feminine representation
• 47:45–49:21 – The significance of opening tracks, Lennon’s intent
• 67:22–67:49 – Missed opportunity for liner notes and context
• 68:36–69:33 – Impact of omission on generational listeners and Lennon’s legacy
• 70:35–71:54 – Perceptions of offensiveness and censorship
• 73:07 – Final thoughts on the Beatles as a “reliable source of joy” and cultural refuge

---

Tone & Style

The conversation is thoughtful, passionate, and frank—a mixture of scholarly, fan, and contemporary cultural critique. Both host and guest highlight absurdities, ironies, and missed opportunities, maintaining a passionate belief in the Beatles and Lennon as agents of real and lasting change, while lamenting the cost of institutional timidity and oversensitivity in art and remembrance.

---

Closing Thoughts

Rodriguez and Leonard argue that by omitting “Woman Is the Nigger of the World,” the box set’s curators missed a vital historical and cultural opportunity—one to foster dialogue about intent, evolution, and the relevance of feminism and social critique. They see the Beatles, and Lennon in particular, as still urgently resonant in a 2025 wracked by misogyny and regressive politics. Art should not be sanitized but contextualized and discussed. The Beatles’—and Lennon’s—legacy endures as a cultural touchstone, but that legacy deserves honesty, not erasure.

---

Recommended for:
Beatleologists, music historians, cultural critics, feminists, and listeners interested in understanding how legacy, offense, and context intersect in today’s “cancel culture,” and how revisiting the past can illuminate the present.

---

For specific quotes or topics, refer to the detailed timestamps above.

Transcript

[Shopify Advertiser]

When you think about businesses that are selling through the roof, like aloe or allbirds, sure you think about a great product, a cool brand and great marketing. But an often overlooked secret is actually the businesses behind the business making, selling and for shoppers buying. Simple. For millions of businesses, that business is Shopify. Nobody does online business better than Shopify. It's home of Shop Pay, the number one checkout in the world. You can use it to boost conversions up to 50%, meaning way less carts going abandoned and way more sales going through. To checkout, sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com income all lowercase go to shopify.com income to upgrade your selling today. That's shopify.com income.

[Podcast Host]

This episode is brought to you by White Claw Search Great podcast pick friend. No surprises there. After all, you're all about finding the tastiest flavors out there, just like White Claw Surge. And with big bold flavors to enjoy like blood orange, BlackBerry, cranberry and more, it's time to go all in on taste. Unleash the flavor. Unleash White Claw Surge. Please drink responsibly. Hard seltzer with flavors 8% alcohol by volume. White cloth seltzer works Chicago, Illinois so there's been a lot of breaking news of late concerning upcoming deluxe full Bells and Whistles packages coming out of Beetle World. And we've got two that were announced like back to back the Power to the People John and Yoko set commemorating the one to one shows as well as the album that came out concurrently with that. That seems to be a bit hidden, but within this release, to put it one way, and that was quickly superseded by the news of the long predicted anthology revamp of both the documentary new version of the book in paperback. I don't think it's augmented or in any way revised per se, it's just softbound. And then the Anthology 4 set, following the heels of Anthologies 1, 2, and 3, which came out in 1995. So you've got an anniversary year here and as usual with Beetle World with people that are hardcore fans, plenty of things to be dissatisfied about. But I thought that the first one, the Power to the People, set a very big critical serious omission with that that warranted a discussion. And we had just done the political show not that long ago, Candy Leonard and I. I didn't expect to be talking to her again quite so soon, but I saw this as a topic totally in her wheelhouse. As someone who has written about the the Beatles in the context of their cultural place both in their times through the present day in her book Beatleness, which you should check out if you've not already read it. So I thought she'd be the perfect person to have a conversation with, to hash out this thing that has stirred up a tempest in a teapot, as it were, in Beetle World Online. Lots of debating back and forth about decision making concerning this release.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

So.

[Podcast Host]

So here with our conversation. Ever since I did the post on my Facebook page and in the newsletter, I want to hear from women. Because men with opinions about music are a dime a dozen. Which is not to say they're all worthless, but it's like, I don't need to ask a guy twice, what's your opinion of this musical situation? I don't have to. They're forthcoming. Women seem to be more reticent. And that's something we can talk about a little more in this conversation. Cause you and I have talked about this before. There were a few people commented, well, why aren't you asking from African Americans about this?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

And.

[Podcast Host]

And it never occurred to me to do that simply because this is a song explicitly about women and their historic treatment. It's not a song about African Americans. That's why I.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Of course not. But here it's not. But the controversy that we're talking about, I. E. That it was omitted, is about fear of offending people in this moment of our history where people just love to get offended. And rightly so, in some cases, you know, so the song is not about African American, it's about women. And the offensive word is really being used as a metaphor in a sense. Right?

[Podcast Host]

Right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes. So you're right. It's not a bad. But. But given that unless the women happen.

[Podcast Host]

To be African American.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. Which then gets into intersectionality and all that. Which can be very interesting. But. But the thing is. But given why we're even talking about this, that the. We are assuming, I think, rightly or wrongly, that the decision to leave it off the new compilation is based on the fact that that word is offensive. So if that's the case, then the song doesn't change its meaning. But this conversation about the song then becomes about African Americans. You know what I mean?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. And see, that's the reason I purposely didn't say, by the way, any African American listeners of sappy out there, what do you think? Is because I didn't see it in any way as a black issue per se. Because until and unless I see a constituency out there that is offended from the black community, John Lennon how dare you use. And what are they suggesting? That we own the word? That we have been degraded historically with through the years. That's a whole other conversation. Until I see some kind of outbreak of outrage from the black community. I didn't think it was a black issue per se. Enough that I needed to weigh in on that. I thought it was more about women. This is a song championing them. If they're black, fine. But a. What did they think about it going back to 1972? Not that you necessarily had to be alive in 1972. Did you think that this was a worthwhile. And it's certainly well intended. But this attempt to bring their issues to the mainstream and to male listeners. Because I think the song is addressed to male listeners. So you need a Better Life in 1972. What do you think about it now? Because as we talked about previously, of all the topical songs on this album, Etiquette and the Irish Troubles and Angela Davis and John Sinclair. This is the evergreen. Yeah, this is the evergreen. This is the song that is just as relevant today. Do you. You don't even have to be a Beatle fan or a Lennon fan. And certainly the conversation around John Lennon has changed from 1972 to where it is now, particularly among Gen Z people. That you can't go on social media and Google John Lennon's name without seeing all this. He beat women and he was all this torrent of negative aha. Stuff that's supposed to wipe out any good he put into the world. We must cancel him in the face of that. What do women think now about the song?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, But. But what you were just saying about how Gen Z and people who are just coming to John Lennon are learning about the negative aspects, let's say, of. About his behavior and whatnot. All the more reason why taking this song out of this collection, it's silencing and it's disappearing. His evolution as a man and as a feminist. And that's what makes it wrong.

[Podcast Host]

It seems to be preempting a much needed conversation. It's like universal. We don't even want to talk about this. We don't want this out there. It opens too many doors we'd rather not go through. So let's just silence this issue completely before it gets any traction. Record companies and corporations generally don't. Chess. So if you're thinking we took it out just to get a conversation going anyway because now its omission is going to spark conversation. I don't think they're thinking like that. I think they just rather avoid it.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

We're assuming that they took it out because they were afraid of getting some backlash about the use of that word. Now, it may also be that they didn't like the feminist message.

[Podcast Host]

You know, we don't know. Many females are sitting at the corporate boardroom.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right. So it's like, do you agree with the working assumption that the rationale behind this was that people would find the word offensive or that it would just seem wrong to be putting that word out there?

[Podcast Host]

I think that rather than looking at this as a teachable moment, as an opportunity to explain the context around it, just as John took great pains to do in 1972 on the Cavett show and going to the offices of Jet magazine, this black media empire, to explain it, get their tacit, if not explicit approval. Yes, we see what you're saying, John. We agree with your message. They didn't want to deal with any of that. I think what they're reacting to maybe is the reality of the 21st century. Instant judgment, super short attention spans. You know, what's gonna be on TikTok about this, that we don't wanna face that blowback. And maybe thought that the blowback of putting it out there would be more substantial than the blowback of not putting it out there. And so they chose the lesser of the two evil choices.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Wrong decision. I mean, it's possible too that they thought that would make John look like a racist, which is ridiculous, but of course it is.

[Podcast Host]

He's married to an Asian woman, for starters.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

And you know, they have a. You know, the Beatles have a history of being very much not racist, even like making fun of Enoch Powell, but also going back to the not playing for segregated audiences. So, yeah, I mean, again, it gets back to like, what were those conversations in those C suites when they decided to omit this, what is arguably one of his most important songs, I think. And what was Shawn's role in it? Because it's really a betrayal of his parents legacy in a major, major way, I think.

[Podcast Host]

I think the silence of not putting out any statement at all was deafening from a guy who is known, if you follow him on social media, a bit of a troll, a bit of a provocateur. I would expect no less from the child of John Lennon and Yoko Ono. But in that absence of some kind of statement, you get people rushing to fill that with their interpretations. And what you would come away with is there's no profiles and courage here. Corporations, you don't expect it from. They're here to make money. They're not here to get political change the world generally. And Sean in. Clearly, there was a fight in 2022 when this sometime in New York City special deluxe edition was being prepared for release. It was ready back then. It had been remastered and tweaked and all that stuff based on the whispers we hear behind the scenes that he dug in his heels then it didn't come out. Then they had a web domain reserved and everything. So it was very real. It was imminent. It didn't come out. This must have been the bone of contention maybe three years on. When you've got now the Wind behind you of these projects celebrating the politization of Johnny yoko during that period. 71, 72 of Daytime Revolution, the Mike Douglas show doc follow the by the one to one concert. But I shouldn't call it a concert film, but a very much a documentary exploring their politics using the concerts as a backdrop. It would seem that you're paving the way to then follow it with the political statement of the day. But instead they pull their punches. I could see Shawn being in the position of, well, I'd rather be out now while we've got this window discussing their politics. And if that's the breaking point between Universal putting it out and not putting it out, I guess I'm gonna have to swallow that bitter pill to get it out. But absent an explanation, who is he not wanting to offend at this point? He's offended the fact.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, there's also. Frankly, there's really not. I mean, musically this stuff is right. With the exception of the song they omitted, which is just. Musically, it's just phenomenal. The vocal is magnificent.

[Podcast Host]

It really is.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

The horn.

[Podcast Host]

He could have been singing about anything at all, and we'd be honoring that song with anything else in his legacy. It's just a fantastic.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I know. And so it really, it's. It just like it takes the wind out of the sails. Like, in other words, like we're gonna. We're gonna put together this collection showing them as political figures, as part of history, whatever. And then it just makes no sense to omit the song that not only stands up the most musically and just as a performance and as a record, but also who's meaning and significance is more is just as relevant now, if not even more so than it was 50 years ago. Because nothing has changed.

[Podcast Host]

They're in peril all over again.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right? We have misogynists running our government. We have women earning 83 cents for every dollar that men earn. We have women losing Reproductive rights. We have the misogynists running our government talking about rescinding the 19th Amendment. So this is a song that should be, like you said, it's evergreen. Like, it should be out there. It should be talked about. And it's. I don't know how many, how large the demographic that, you know, the market is for this collection that they're calling Power to the People. Just the fact that they chose. They want to somehow preserve the legacy of them as political figures. And so to take off this song again, I mean, it just. It makes no sense. It really makes no sense. I mean, it could have really been. I don't know, maybe there's some other way. I mean, I was thinking maybe there's some other way to get it out into the world. But, you know, getting back to Sean's acquiescence to this. Well, that's our theory. We don't know. But surely he had the resources to take this somewhere else or maybe go around them somehow, or make a stronger case. Maybe. Maybe bring, you know, if the fear is offending black people, which I'm kind of assuming is probably what it's about, rather than they don't want to put out a feminist message. Although it could be that too. Sean could have brought in just as John 50 years ago went to Jet magazine and the head of the Black Caucus, Ron Dellums, vouched for this. Surely Sean could have done a 2025 equivalent, right?

[Podcast Host]

Yes, yes, but.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

So, yeah, it's really wrong. The more I think about it, the more wrong it is. But then on the other hand, I think given all the regressive politics that we're experiencing right now, you know, like, well, maybe this isn't the most important thing we should all be getting upset about. But, you know, I don't know. It's pretty disturbing, really. It's just wrong.

[Podcast Host]

Well, it is not a way to honor the work of his parents, assuming that he. He had any kind of be the last guy to have the right of refusal on this thing. The corporation's like, we're gonna do it, but for this song, are we gonna do this or not, Sean? And if he's like, fine. It does seem like a betrayal that, number one, he's not talking about it. Number two, as you said, there is historic precedent. When 1968, John and Yoko determined to put out two versions with that cover and given EMI is like, we're not putting this out. So they give the workaround of. In the UK Track Records, an indie label that the Huron and Hendrix and In America, Tetragrammaton. It gets distributed by. Partly owned by Bill Cosby. Make of that what you will. At least they got it out. Yeah, you could see this being made available as a download somewhere. It's never been easier for an artist to distribute their music and make it available to their audience. I saw there had been speculation early on, well, maybe it's a hidden track. That's a real profile. Courage too. But they clarified, said, no, there's no hidden tracks. This is what's listed here. And as a side issue, as a footnote to this whole thing, I guess in the. The two shows, afternoon evening shows are part of the package. They removed Yoko's seemingly not offensive in any way. Sisters. Oh, Sisters. And the reason given is so that there's not more Yoko songs than John songs in the concert. They're like equal. If we're gonna take away one of his, that's gonna shift the bal. Which speaks volumes about the subject of the song in the first place.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. Well, that song though does appear in a different version on this collection, right?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, like there's demos and I think the studio take might be there, but they cut it from the shows.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

So there's all kinds of logic at work here that to us on the outside makes no sense. But to me, the bottom line is this is a moment where not only is the song more fitting than ever, but show some guts. I mean, we've seen plenty of examples of people who should know better backing down in the face of perceived blowback. And fewer people standing up to this at a time when it demands it, it demands. This is the line in the sand. This is where I'm not backing down. You want to have this fight, let's have this fight. I may lose, but I'm going to have this fight. Rather than sidestep it and duck it all together. That to me, cowardly might be too strong a word. As you say, there's bigger issues in the world right now than a 50 year old record coming out. I think that if you had all stood for principles, this is an easy.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

One, you know, I mean, one of the things I. One of the aspects of the Beatles I like to talk about is their importance to American history. Like, we don't often think of them in that. Like the Beatles as important to. But they were because again, there were so many baby boomers who just glommed on, you know, started following them and never looked away to this day. Right. And you look at how the Beatles and their fans remade the world as My subtitle says, and then even after the fact that the voting age was lowered, just all the changes that they were a catalyst for and were part of. So to then, you know, the absence of the song just undermines that in a way. I mean, it doesn't change history, but it really. It's an omission that this phrase that comes to mind is. Takes the wind out of his hills. In other words, this was almost like he did this post Beatles. Right. This is like that, almost like a. As eight years before he was murdered. Right. So it's like. It's a real portrait, in a sense, of who he was and who he became as a result of living through the 60s, meeting Yoko, becoming a different kind of person. And so to remove that from the official record of what they're putting out is really. It's really an insult to him. It's an insult to both of them, but it's really. It's really an insult to the whole historical record of the 60s in a way. I mean, I don't know, it's just. It's just cowardly. And, you know, we're assuming that it was because they don't. They were afraid of offending black people. But I'm wondering if it really wasn't just like the fact that John Lennon as a outspoken, genuine, highly evolved man who became a feminist, maybe, like, you know, maybe some people don't like that so much.

[Podcast Host]

It could be. It's definitely. There's no other way to look at it but a perception acting of. Out of not wishing to offend. And we're in 2025 now at a time when the word in question is probably more prevalent in popular culture than it was in 1972.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

But not so much by white people of this fear. Right. It was definitely calculated, 1972, to shock, to bring attention.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes, it did.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. But we should also recognize John was not alone. You had that great statement from the congressman that we have quoted in the show we just did on the politics. I played John reciting it in full in the Dick Cabot show so people can find it there. But it was a way of showing exactly, precisely the way it was intended in his song. And he was not alone in that. We had Patti Smith doing her song, that word within a few years of that. It was definitely something being used in that fashion, not as a slur on blacks, but as a way to repurpose the power of that word to greater good.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. It's a meta. He's using it kind of as A metaphor. He's taking it out of that context, but yet preserving its essential meaning, you.

[Podcast Host]

Know, and, yeah, rethink of that word this way. Not just people with color in their.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Skin, but, yeah, the artistry of it. That's the brilliance of it. Not to mention the music itself. You know, the song as a song is just. And the vocal. The vocal is just really just wonderful. And so, I don't know, you know, like, this thing, like, people, you know, hardcore Beatle fans, know that this is coming and whatnot. I mean, I don't know how much of a promotion they're gonna do, how many. You know, this might end up being like a tree falling on a desert island, you know, so we'll see what happens when it comes out. But I think it would be interesting to know how black people feel about it. Maybe some people can respond to this when they hear this. I don't know. I think it's wrong. It's an insult to John, it's an insult to Yoko, and it's an insult to John and Yoko. You know what I mean?

[Podcast Host]

Like, yeah, it's to their artistic legacy, for sure. There was a very perceptive listener that chimed in, some correspondents saying something along the lines of, there are statues that need to be torn down. This is not one of them.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes, I would agree. I would agree, I would agree. So I recently discovered a singer called Lola Young who has a song called Messy, which I had. I mean, apparently it's a big hit. There was an article about her in the. In the Times, and they were comparing her to Amy Winehouse and all this. So I was, you know, I was curious. So I read the article about her, and I don't really see the comparison to Amy Winehouse other than the fact that she's British and kind of, you know, has this kind of very in your face Persona. But anyway, she has this song called Messy, which is just a great song musically, I think. But the chorus of this song really is. Just echoes the song we're talking about because it's sort of like it's one woman. You know, she's talking in the first person as a woman about whatever I do is wrong. I do this, you complain, I do that, I complain. You know, in other words, how. How am I supposed to be in the world? Whatever I do, you're complaining is wrong. I can. I can be a hundred different people and you hate the whole fucking lot of them, you know, so there's. And, you know, knowing that we were going to be talking about the song we're talking about. I thought, well, isn't this funny? Like, this is the same sentiment, you know, expressing how women are. The culture forces women into these no win situations, you know?

[Podcast Host]

Absolutely. Did you happen to have the lyrics in front of you?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

They're on my.

[Podcast Host]

Because I do if you don't.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Oh, yeah, yeah. Why don't you read them?

[Podcast Host]

Okay. And I'm too messy and then I'm too fucking clean. You told me, get a job. Then you ask where the hell I've been and I'm too perfect till I open my big mouth. I want to be me. Is that not allowed? And I'm too clever and then I'm too fucking dumb. I hate it when I cry unless it's that time of the month or you hate it when I cry unless it's that time of the month and I'm too perfect till I show you that I'm not. A thousand people I could be for you and you hate the fucking lot. If that's not an echo.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, I mean, it's, it's amusing, but it's also kind of sad, you know.

[Podcast Host]

We'Re having the same conversation this many years later and some reason the thing won't be in another 50 years.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Sadly, the thing about John was like, I don't know how much Yoko had a hand in writing the lyrics. Whatever John's singing it. So here's a man making these observations and he's saying to his fellow men, take a look at the one you're with. In other words, it's kind of talking to men. But he was able to capture this tyranny that women live under. And here, 50 years later, this young woman talking in the first person, John was looking at it over here or over here, she's living it, you know, and she's. It's the same thing. And so again, the song is still relevant. And of course, now women's place in pop music, rock music has certainly changed and developed. And so, yeah, so now we have Young talking about this. And of course, through the years there's been, you know, the two biggest artists.

[Podcast Host]

In the world right now, arguably, are women. Beyonce and Taylor Swift.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, Right.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

The biggest artists in the world are women. And they still. And they still get like shit and like cheap put downs. Even like Taylor Swift getting engaged is like the right has to chime in. Oh, maybe now she's gonna settle down and do the right thing and be a wife and submit to her husband. You know, it's like, go away. You know, I've Been fooled to think that I've been observing the last gasp of patriarchy for about 20 years. But, like, it's a really long gasp.

[Podcast Host]

Well, talk about wind at your back these days. There it is.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

Sadly, I had wondered. This is a thought I had, because a lot of times, if something comes out that might be of controversy, then you see other people taking up the mantle and helping push it forward. Like, historically, Yoko has been very undervalued musically as an artist. There's a lot of people just equate her artistry with screaming. And certainly that was a part of it, it's not all of it. And then when she dabbles in pop, well, you're really bad at this, too, you know. So in the wake of John's death, there was that album that came out, Every Man As a Woman, that was like all these other artists that already had cred and pop rock doing nothing but Yoko material. You know, you had Harry Nilsson, Roberta Flack, Elvis Costello, and they were doing Yoko material and perfectly fine. And maybe if they'd originated that material, you wouldn't have heard a bad word about it. All art is in the era of the beholder music. And so it's not for us to say, yes, you should appreciate Yoko. Yes, you should enjoy and buy her records. You know, who the hell cares? I don't care if you do or not. But you can't dismiss the fact that she's not without talent, okay? Whether you like that or not, for whatever people feel about this particular song, it occurred to me there were other personal songs of John's that got covered right away. Like Mother. Barbra Streisand did a wonderful version of back around 1971-72. What if a female, or at least another artist had done this song?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Maybe that's gonna happen as a result of. Maybe that will be a result of this controversy. Maybe Lola Young or I don't know that Taylor would do it. But like, Beyonce, chaperone, some kind of ballsy female singer today would take that. That'd be awesome.

[Podcast Host]

It would be. And I just wonder if that would take a lot of the sting out of the conversation or at least the perception of a blowback. If we put the song out that, oh, people aren't going to get it and John Lennon's gonna be crucified as a racist. And whatever else that they're fearing, which I don't think is well founded at all, I think they are missing the point.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

They understand maybe they should do it.

[Podcast Host]

Totally, totally. And that Blackbird is low hanging fruit. People made such a big deal out of that. And I didn't think that was anything very brave at all. That's.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

The people should do it. Maybe Paul.

[Podcast Host]

It'd be very croaky. It's too bad Nina Simone's not around because she would have been. I don't know if you're aware, back in the day she did a response song to Revolution, that sort of half cover, half her own thing. And her arrangement, George's Old Brown Shoe, it seems to be pretty well modeled after it.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Huh.

[Podcast Host]

And then she of course did Isn't it pity? And other stuff. So she was listening. They were listening to her. In fact, in the newest show I did where they're being asked in 1965 when they're on tour, what American artist do you listen to? It's George throws up Nina Simone.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. I remember reading that.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, yeah. Somebody fearless. This is what the Times call for right now. John could do it back then. And it should be pointed out. Power to the people. Which is what they're hanging this whole collection on. That was not his phrase. He repurposed it. He's the guy that came up with all you need is love and give peace a chance. And where this fits in the chronology is he did imagine, which he said was the sugar coated version of Plastic Ono Band. Did much better chart wise. Gave him that evergreen song. Follows that up with Happy Christmas, War is Over, another politically charged song that people revere. And it has Yoko on it. You hear it to death every holiday season. Been covered a million times. This was the album after that. So he's going in this hugely political trajectory as we see in the one to one film. And you get the sense of. And daytime Revolution. He's come to America, he's living here now. Him and Yoko started out with Give peace a Chance and this whole betting for peace thing. Now they're full on taking on every political cause that comes their way. Pad Ratty being hanged in Britain and whatever support they had of the ira. And both John and Paul responded to the Bloody Sunday thing. But Paul was savvy enough to put out an instrumental version on his B side, so at least that would get airplay.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. But all these causes that they were singing about, I mean, the situation in Ireland has been resolved for the most. You know, like we were saying before, John Sinclair is long dead. You know, the Attica prison riot, which was a big deal at the time. You know, I mean, yes, there's still people who are concerned about prison reform and America having Such a. So many people in prison, you know, not that these issues really ever go away, but this song, the opening track on Sometime in New York City, and it opens with that incredible horn section, which really. I mean, the horns almost. They're almost like a vocal, you know, they. They're telling, you know. Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

Strings as well.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. So, yeah, again, it would be really great. I like this idea of somebody, you know, again, this could be the tree on the desert. I'm like, how many people are gonna get all incensed and excited about this? Hardcore Beatles fans, collectors, I don't know how many units they think they're gonna move of this.

[Podcast Host]

There's a finite number of boomers with deep pockets that can buy this stuff.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Exactly, exactly. I almost think they're doing market research in real time. I really think so. Like, they're put, let's do this. And then we're going to get The Anthology and Anthology 4. But it's not really anything new. And, you know, and I'd like to hear the Rubber Soul redone. Speaking of Rubber Soul, you know, I was talking about this with somebody, and it's really like, taking this song off there. Off Sometime in New York City is like, okay, we're gonna do the Giles Martin workover of Rubber Soul, but we're gonna leave off Run for your Life because it might offend people. Like, that's. I mean, it's not a direct. It's not an exact analogy, but it speaks to this very fear of offending people. And, like, we can't do anything that's gonna cause a backlash from left or the right, you know, Right.

[Podcast Host]

Or framing the Beatles as politically incorrect or John Lentz.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, that's what it is. It's framing. It gets back to the song we're talking about. About framing the Beatles as politically incorrect. Like, they don't want to do that. They don't want to do that.

[Podcast Host]

I wonder what Disney has to say about this whole thing, because they're pretty much in bed with the Beatles these days now anyway.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Oh, well, Disney would certainly not want to. They would probably agree to. With. With the. With cutting that song for sure.

[Podcast Host]

We'll put out your anthology this year, but we're thinking about that song. You guys want to put on Power to the People Maybe not so much.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Also, you know, the fact that. That all the Beatles things that have come out of the video have been on, you know, streaming services is also, I think, kind of not so great. It's not democratic. These things cost money. You know, it's like Again, this is the world we live in. So like, maybe this is a minor point, but like when Anthology came out in the 90s, it was on network TV. There was HBO, then there was Cinemax, then they didn't go that route. They had. Everybody could see it. All right.

[Podcast Host]

It was democratized.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, it's a different beast now. But you know, I mean, could have been, you know, maybe Netflix, you know, whatever. They working with Disney. Disney's clearly their prefer. Or is it Apple T? I don't even know.

[Podcast Host]

No, it's Disney. As had been Peter Jackson's Get Back. As had been Beatles 64. As had been Let It Be. So that's the bed they're lying in these days.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

The Disneyfication of the Beatles, which would be the topic of a great book and in fact I think it is, it's coming.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

The Disneyfication of the Beatles. Yeah, well, you know, there are ways in which to talk about their Disneyfication. That's not a bad thing. Right. But there are other ways, you know, that it is not such a great thing. You know, as Bowie said, Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow.

[Podcast Host]

I'd go to a yellow submarine theme park.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, yeah, well, there was a yellow submarine ride, I think. I don't know if it's still there. Near the Berlin Wall. There was apparently a playground, you know, after the wall came down, that there was a yellow submarine ride or amusement. It's not an amusement, but like a ride of some kind.

[Podcast Host]

Huh, that's fitting.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I vaguely remember reading that. Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

In the spirit of. There are statues that should be torn down and some that shouldn't. I don't see this as being one, but the thought had occurred to me the other day because it is the anniversary everywhere but America. Because God knows you can show blood and guts spilled every platform. But the suggestion of sexuality. Forget it. That's for bolton. Blind Fates 1969 album cover problematic.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Very much so.

[Podcast Host]

Uh huh. I mean so much so in 1969 that the US had an alternate cover for it.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

You know, that's an area where I am not all about preserving artistic integrity.

[Podcast Host]

Right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Because it's just too much.

[Podcast Host]

You know, not everything that is censored is censored for the same reasons. A political statement is different than sexualizing a pre adolescent female.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right. How am I able to conjure that in my mind? How do I know what it looks.

[Podcast Host]

Like if I think it came out on the CD? And again, you know, the 90s was a different, much more open society than the one living in Now, I would.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Have to say I remember. I feel like I remember seeing that at the time.

[Podcast Host]

Maybe there was both in this country. I own the alternate cover. It's from 1969. So maybe it was released here.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Maybe it was released, like, maybe there was a first printing and then it was.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, it could be. It could be.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I feel like I saw it at the time.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. And maybe you did two versions, had the. Even when it got distributed, it had that brown paper tear off cover on it. But we've been hashing this. This whole topic out. We know the Rolling Stones have dropped brown sugar from their live sets.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right.

[Podcast Host]

Does that mean the reissue of Sticky Fingers now has to cut off the opening track because of fear of offending people? I would grant you, most people don't even know the lyrics to that song.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right.

[Podcast Host]

It was sort of a self censorship or pointed out by people that, you know, want to cancel everything. But strolling in the market down in New Orleans, it's perfectly fine for me. The. It's not what the lyric is.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, yeah. I mean, these are tricky questions, but, you know, this thing about the sexualization of underage women, of girls, which, of course, is quite timely. There's a lot of that in 60s rock. Lots of it.

[Podcast Host]

And again, viewing it through a 21st century sensibility and seeing it's like, whoa, how did they ever get away with this? Well, you weren't there. It was a different time. I remember seeing naked children in footage from Woodstock. I don't think that raised any eyebrows. I do know now if I post the COVID of House of the holy Led Zeppelin's 1973 album on Facebook, it gets taken down.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well. Children of hippies frolicking in the mud naked is not. They're not being sexualized 100%. Right.

[Podcast Host]

Pete Townsend's trouble that he got into plenty of people. And I know this because I post stuff daily, still look at him as a pedophile. He was not a pedophile.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

No. Wasn't he going through his own trauma? And that's why he. I mean, didn't he write about that, that he was exploring his own. The abuse that he himself had experienced, wasn't he?

[Podcast Host]

Yes. He had suppressed memories that had been bubbling up of his own sexual abuse when he was a child in the care of his grandmother, when he was in single digits, which was why he had Entwistle write those songs on Tommy, because he couldn't face it at the time about Uncle Ernie and Cousin Kevin. So when he got in trouble, he was getting ready to write his autobiography. And I guess the story was that he went to a porn site and entered his credit card and then immediately pulled out. His thought process at the time was, my bank will be able to trace this and I will be able to bring down these companies using that digital footprint. He didn't download anything. He didn't take it any further, which was why the authorities cleared him. They gave him an advice, you know, don't do it again. But nobody, I think that is serious, as looked into it, mistakes him for being any kind of pedophile. I'm sure Roger Daltrey would have killed him a long time ago if he was, but people have that perception. So there was a single he put out in 1979 where he was basically the backing musician for this little girl singer named Angie. I don't know if you're aware of a song called Peppermint Lump came out in 1979 at Stiff. We got played in Chicago on the radio. It's sort of a novelty track. He sings background, but the girl sings the lyric. So the pictures promoting the single are of him sort of in the background and her in a schoolgirl outfit about the age of 10. You cannot post that anymore without people going, oh, there is. That's a scary picture of Townsend the pedophile in the works. It's like, Jesus. Not everything has to be the worst possible conclusion you wish to draw. But it's unfortunate that this is the world we live in now. So you look at things like naked hippie kids playing in the mud in Woodstock at 69. Why are you choosing to sexualize that? That was not the context.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right. Well, again, I mean, I think a lot of it gets to this sort of like, you know, we live in an age, for whatever reason, you know, people have antennae up for this stuff and are very easily offended or offended on someone else's behalf. Right. There's a lot of being offended on someone else's behalf, sexualizing. I mean, you can look at the early Britney Spears videos when she first came out. I mean, you know, Hot for Teacher, the old video, what's His Face, David Lee Roth. I mean, there's a lot of sexualizing of teenage girls. It's like a given, you know, it's just everywhere. So what's okay and what's not okay? I don't know. It's hard to say. Clearly, as a culture, it's probably, all things considered, not so great that images like that have been consumed over the years because it provides permission in a way. I Don't know. I mean, this just gets into all kinds of stuff that is really disturbing, you know, and I don't know. I don't know.

[Podcast Host]

Is this an overcorrection, you think?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

You mean that people get offended, like when you put up Houses of the Holy or stuff like that? Yeah, if it's an overcorrection. Because there is in fact a lot of this stuff goes on.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, it absolutely does. But that is not the context for whatever it is being put out. I don't think blind faith, I mean, it was, in hindsight, ill advised, but I think it was some kind of artistic statement. Just like the butcher cover was that you may not get it, maybe you're not sophisticated, but they weren't trying to put kiddie porn on an album cover. Let's see if we can get away with this.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

They wouldn't have seen it as kiddie porn, but the fact is that these guys, these rock gods, did in fact have sex with underage girls. They did. And so it was par for the course in their world.

[Podcast Host]

It was normalized.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. And so I don't think they said, oh, we're gonna put kitty porn on the COVID They probably didn't even see it as porn.

[Podcast Host]

Right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I don't know.

[Podcast Host]

Right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I don't know. You know, sensibilities change, I guess. I don't know. But it's hard not to think about all this right now in the context of the whole Epstein thing, obviously.

[Podcast Host]

Yes.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

And so. I don't know. I don't know. That goes back to what we were originally talking about, which is the status of females, women, girls in our culture and the fact that again, this is way off topic, but maybe not that these girls were able to be lured in to that because they were lost poor, no confidence, no self esteem. How am I going to make it in this world? This is an avenue for comfort, wealth, whatever. So it's an exploitation. You know, in other words, when people are disadvantaged or low in the have low status, they're more easily taken advantage of. Right, sure. You know, they're more vulnerable.

[Podcast Host]

So in the case of that cover, I've read about it, and it was this girl got spotted on a bus or something like that, and it was with her parents blessing that she posed, which is a whole other thing.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. But look at all the moms who willingly let their sons play with Michael Jackson.

[Podcast Host]

Right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I mean, you know, you know, sometimes.

[Podcast Host]

The parents aren't the best safeguards of their kids.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Parents maybe see it again as an avenue towards a better life. Some way or proximity to wealth and power, you know? I don't know. I don't know. I mean, people. You know, money is. People are highly motivated to do things from money. Yeah. But I mean, it's funny about that Blind Faith cover, because I haven't thought about it in years, but as soon as you mentioned it, I was able to bring it to mind, you know?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

At the Led Zeppelin one, too. And I was like, never a big fan. I mean, I. Casual fan of both of these things, but yet I was able to bring it to mind. This reminds me, and this is maybe off topic, but like, the Life magazine from 1964 with the promotion for Goldfinger. Do you ever see that picture?

[Podcast Host]

I'm sure I have. I mean.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Shirley Eaton, and she's completely covered in gold. And this is a cover of Life magazine, which at the time was like. It was on everybody's coffee table. Right, right.

[Podcast Host]

As mainstream as could be.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

A very kind of very erotic, very, very loaded image. Why am I bringing this up? I don't know. I mean, it's just these.

[Podcast Host]

It was considered normal and not exploitative at the time, right?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

It was. It was. You know, I mean, it was probably a little bit shocking at the time because it was. It wasn't like in a. Well, I mean, it was. It was on a. It was in a family magazine. Like, I mean, I personally had a. I remembered this. I hadn't thought about it in many years, and I guess it was probably. Well, I've been off Facebook for five years, so it was probably like six or seven years ago. Somebody put it on Facebook and it blew my mind. And I remembered it and I actually wrote something about this because for me, as. As I was eight years old, I was really struck by that image. And it was when I sort of feel like I became aware of what we now call the male gaze, that, like, this was. I don't know, it was a very evocative image for me as a kid and as a girl, as a young girl. So these album covers, these representations of women or girls, I mean, they're very powerful. You know, they affect people.

[Podcast Host]

I think, well, that leads back to two virgins, and you would have been of age enough and a Beatle fan. What was your reaction? It's not a sexualized.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I thought it was funny picture. I thought, you know, as I talk about in Beatleness, I mean, John and Yoko became like. And I don't know if I talk about it in Beatleness, because Beatleness ends when the Beatles End. But like they were. I wrote about it elsewhere. They were like a side spectacle that we watched alongside of. Actually, no Two Virgins would have been in that time period.

[Podcast Host]

It coincides with the White Album.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, I thought it was funny. I didn't. I mean, I just. It was like John and Yoko being John and Yoko, you know, I didn't find it sexual. It wasn't, didn't offend me. I thought it was great. Part of the appeal of him at that time was the audacity. Right. And that of course continued into the song that we've been discussing. Right. But his audacity was very appealing to me and all of fans watching that. You know, those two virgins, it didn't strike me as sexual. In fact, I remember the quote that Paul said, when two virgins meet, it's a humbling experience or something. We were, me and my little band of hippies, like, we would like go around talking about this. It was not at all sexual or shock. I mean, it was maybe shocking, but it was like, oh, John, it's like, he's our guy, you know, he's our guy.

[Podcast Host]

Do you remember the pushback and the outrage?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I do. And also about the butcher yesterday and today?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, uh huh.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. The butcher cover.

[Podcast Host]

So it's sort of up a piece. There's a through line.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes, yes. Right.

[Podcast Host]

That's an interesting way of saying it.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. And also to the song that we've been talking about. But if you can even take the through line further back. They were, well, John especially became increasingly more audacious. But they were audacious from the beginning. Right. I mean, they were shocking in their way from the very beginning.

[Podcast Host]

Sure. And just how much further can we take this out?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right. I think that in some ways, I think that the song that we are discussing is in many ways, like. I'm not gonna say it's his most important song, but like, one could argue that. I don't know that I would necessarily argue that it was most important song, but it's really important song. Especially because it's, you know, it's the post Beatles era and it's. I mean, if he were alive today, if we could like channel him at a seance, like he'd be horrified that this song was omitted. And he was like, what the. Like, how. How can you do that to me? Right. He'd say, how can you. How can you. Silence. He's being silenced, he's being defanged. The male feminist is being emasculated. You know, it's like, don't. It's just so wrong, you know? But, yeah, I mean, the. You know, they always. There was an audacity to them all.

[Podcast Host]

Through, you know, especially if you want to kind of read of how important that song was to him. It's the opening track.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes.

[Podcast Host]

Which is where he put Mother and Imagine and Starting over and Mind Games. That was his vehicle for my grand opening statement. Opening tracks on albums are very important, as he knew as a Beatle, and he continued that going to solo years. And anybody around him had to know that.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Almost like a fanfare. It's like, yeah, it opens with this whale.

[Podcast Host]

You know, the sergeant Pepper theme. Yeah, absolutely.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

I know that at the end of his life, when he's doing the big round of interviews for Double Fantasy, he'd sort of taken a step back from his overt leftist politics and was offering up excuses like, yeah, I was guilted into that by Tariq Ali when I did Power to the People and stuff like that. Like, he wanted to be loved by those people because he felt guilty about being a rich guy when he was, at heart a socialist. That was how he explained it away. But the feminist statement, he seems full on in 1980, about men and women equal and all that. I don't remember any specific statement about him regretting that song in 1980, eight years later, even though it's so underperformed commercially. And both he and Paul have a pattern of if something didn't sell, they tend to back away from it. Yeah, that was a mistake. And he does for the album, generally, but not that specific song. But I thought there'd been a statement from Yoko, like, in the last decade or so, where she sort of deflected when being pinned down about. What do you think about that song now?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, yes. She was interviewed in 2015 with Vulture magazine. Okay. She reflected on the song's meaning and impact. She affirmed that the song's core message, highlighting how women have been mistreated, still resonated with her, saying, that was very controversial. What John and I were really saying, or really trying to say was, okay, women are not treated well. That's what it meant, you know. She also discussed another of her feminist tracks, Woman Power, and emphasized how context has evolved. Everything that I said happened already, so we don't have to, try to, quote, teach you anything. It's a very different time now. It's about getting together. We are getting together, and it's a really beautiful thing. I mean, this was in 2015. A lot has changed since then.

[Podcast Host]

Oh, yes.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

In the cultural landscape, for sure, and not in a good way. But, yeah, she stood by the basic sentiment of the song. But I mean, she wasn't asked about the use of that word. But she didn't delve into that aspect. She didn't. But she does say that was very controversial. What John and I were really trying to say was, okay, women are not treated well. I mean, that's, you know, that. Yeah, but, yeah, so she, she chose not to comment on the use of that word, you know, and. Well, the other thing was that apparently, where was it? Okay, so there was a novel written in 1937, considered a classic of the Harlem Renaissance by a woman named Zora Neale Hurston, which includes the line, de nigger woman is de mule de world. So far as I can see whether she, Yoko, John and Yoko knew that. Who knows? You know, once you think of. It's kind of, you know, it's like it's a very easily accessible and understandable metaphor, you know. So, you know, whether. Whether they were aware of the use of this phrase in this novel. Who knows? Probably. I would guess not probably, but who knows? And let's not forget she first used that phrase a couple of years before. Right. In an interview with Nova magazine. So they sat on that for a couple of years before they put it out. I mean, that would have been still in Beatle years. So maybe that. Maybe they didn't want to get into a whole mess with. To apologize for it. But, you know, in 72, I mean, of all the political work, it's the most important, really.

[Podcast Host]

And you can see the time being right. In 72, you've got I Am Woman. I Am Woman was the number one hit single that year it came out. Ultimately, it became a hit after this song was issued, but it was actually recorded first and was in circulation first because it was used in a. A film. I can't remember what it was. It was a feminist comedy directed by Jackie Cooper, of all people, from our gang. I can't remember the name of it right now off the top of my head, but it had been found as an album track on a Helen Reddy album. She re recorded it once it got some attention, that it became the big hit that it was.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I remember that song. I mean, Woman Is the Nigger of the World was never going to be a hit. It just wasn't. Which is not to say it's not important and, you know, still important, but it was never gonna be a hit. And they, you know, I don't think they had any intention of making it a hit. But it was at. It came out at a time when women's lib, as we called it then, was very much. It was right before Roe v. Wade.

[Podcast Host]

Was Equal Rights Amendment in play then?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I think so. I think so, yeah. It was really in the midst of second wave feminism, you know, and, you know, they cut to the chase and said. Said something. Made a very powerful statement, you know.

[Podcast Host]

And it is a song that, okay, you've got that attention getting title and sort of chorus that that's going to put everybody on notice, get their attention. And it is a litany of ways of males mistreating women. So it's evidently directed toward males. Look what you're doing to her. Take a look at the one you're with. He could have gone down a different path. He could have gone down the path of just building the song around putting down males for their bad behavior. I was thinking, what could it be called something like males are the crackers of the world or something like that. Would that have been more acceptable if, number one, he's not using the N word. Number two, he's being much more direct in calling out men? I don't know.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

He was not. He would not have called out men then. I mean, men are still not getting called out by male opinion leaders who could be doing that. It just. It wouldn't happen. It wouldn't. There's no way. I mean, he's alluding to it. He's saying, take a look if you don't believe me, take a look at the one you're with. So he's clearly talking to men, but he's not. He's not. He's not really. He's not asking them to change in that direct kind of way. You know, nobody is. Nobody has been. This is a conversation, you know, and of course, now the discourse about how boys and men are lost and so why they get hooked up with. They follow people like Andrew Tate and all this misogyny that's being inculcated into young boys. I mean, this is a significant problem. It's a real issue. And men and boys need to be lifted up. But you see, what John realized and what feminist men do realize is that it hurts them too. Right? In other words, John came to see that women were the other half of the sky. In other words, that when the oppressor is also oppressed. And he genuinely understood this. And this is why I often say that one of the many, many tragedies about his murder is that because he was. We didn't call them influencers at the time, but he was an influencer. Grand island scale to boomer men, right. And had he lived, he might have been in that role that you're describing. In other words, through music, through whatever means, might have been able to raise the consciousness of men and realize that there's. There's really no upside to being slave master or the whatever to pressing women and patriarchy itself that did you know that it hurts men and women. And people are realizing that now, but that's a conversation that. It's still pretty rare. Who are men who are trying to do that? You know, I mean, some men through their behavior, through their actions, and maybe some artists through their music, but like.

[Podcast Host]

Not through a megaphone.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Not through a megaphone. And of course they get shit for it. You know, it's like they get trolled and name called. And I mean, people talking about Travis Kelce, how he's like this macho football player, but he's like his wife, she's a billionaire, he's only a millionaire. This cultural imperative that men always have to be in charge and like that's how it should be. That that's the order of things is so. It's like air. It's like so taken for just the way things should be. Which is why in 1964, the hair was so threatening because it was suggesting a different social order, you know, and so I don't think that's changed at all. Maybe I'm giving John too much credit. Maybe he couldn't have taken or wouldn't have wanted to take on that role, I don't know. But this gets back to Shawn in a way. Again, Shawn has no responsibility to be a model of a feminist man. However, given his parents and his lineage, you would hope that he has a little bit of that in him and that acquiescing to this song's omission is not consistent with that.

[Podcast Host]

Absolutely. That's a really good way of putting it. I don't know if this conversation is going to get any traction if other people saying it that have bigger platforms have put the word out, but I wonder if at some point he will respond to it because he has to be socially media conscious enough to recognize it's not a good look.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

No, I was just. I was looking at his social media. It looks like he's went on a trip to some. I forget where. Somewhere unusual. I forget. Yeah, he hasn't commented yet. I checked. He hasn't commented.

[Podcast Host]

Now would be a good time to get out of town.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

No, when this is going to be released in November.

[Podcast Host]

No, October, the week of John's birthday.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Okay.

[Podcast Host]

No, November's anthology.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. November is anthology. Right, Right. It'll be around the. I don't know, again, like, how many people are going to care. Know or care. That's really the issue.

[Podcast Host]

Right. I made the comment that I thought it was interesting in corporate thinking that this tempest in a teapot, if you will, because it certainly spiked the social media discourse on the releases of these archival things from the London estate this time, and the outrage about that. And it was quickly followed by Anthology4, which gave Beatle fans something else to be outraged about, because there's plenty of. For different reasons, selling people stuff that's already. Half of which is already out there and not making these choices, which clearly fans want and et cetera, et cetera. It's like, if he wanted. If they were thinking in terms of social media coverage, they couldn't have timed it any better to, like, change the subject from John than to do this with the Beatles.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, some people, you know, who might not be reading your newsletter or other articles about this might buy that and say, wait a minute, what happened to that song?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

And then there are people on your Facebook page. There were people saying, I'm not going to buy it because of that. You know. Yeah. People should take the money they would have spent on that and donate it to some, I don't know, some pro woman. Cause, you know, that would be a.

[Podcast Host]

Good thing if Sean made that statement tomorrow. That would give him some cred, wouldn't it?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

What? To do what I just said.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

To not buy it and. Right.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. Yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I don't know that he would do that, but yes, it would give him some cred. Donate it to, like, people fighting for reproductive rights or whatever, you know, women who are running for office. You know, there's no shortage of places to donate money that uplifts women, that's for sure. But, yeah, I don't know. You know, it has tentacles into so many other issues which are still current and important and impactful.

[Podcast Host]

Mm. Yeah. It would have been a really good conversation to have about that song and the context of it. And take a look around you in 2025.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. And also, you know, again, we talked before about how they're so concerned with, like, Beatles not looking bad in any way, like somebody new to the Beatles. It wouldn't take long before they learned about John's bad behavior. Right. So wouldn't you want to have his last. Not last word, but one of his last words being something that was positive, something that was pro social, pro human and positive.

[Podcast Host]

Depicting evolution, his own personal evolution from not just a male of the last half of the 20th century, but a northern male of England, which were more chauvinistic than most.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Exactly.

[Podcast Host]

And the long journey he had to go on to get to that point where, you know, there's nothing more obnoxious than the newly converted. You know, it's just they're banging on about whatever the topic is. And yes, he did that. He did that about whatever caused him.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

On the Dick Kabut Show. But it was very adorable, it was endearing, and it was sincere, you know, it was sincere.

[Podcast Host]

Thank you. That's the word I was looking for, is that you could tell in that moment at least it was very heartfelt. And he was that way about everything. He latched on to himself, too.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

And he was like light, and he was like, yeah. It was almost a moment of, now that I know what's right, I'm here to show everybody the light, you know.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

He was. Yeah. And then they did the song, Right?

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. To me, it's a good way to push back on all the negative attention he gets in the 21st century from people wandering into the story. Oh, look at that. He's making fun of cripples, you know, things like that.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right.

[Podcast Host]

He was a guy that moved beyond that. You could think of whatever you want about his music and him generally, but in the end, give him a little bit of credibility for wanting to change in a positive direction. He's no more perfect than the rest of us were, but he did it very publicly, very visibly. He laid it all out on the line to. That he should command our respect.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, yeah. I'm thinking back to that de Cavett, you know, his giddy enthusiasm. Really what it was on that De Cavit, where he's explaining to the audience and, you know, Dick Cavett's audience is, you know, of certain strata, whatever. But again, it's like, you know, the idea that patriarchy or any oppressor, oppressed relationship hurts both parties. Right. And so when. When I picture him like the. I think I used the word light before. In other words, he had. He was able to throw that off. In other words, what's often now called the man box, like, he was able to. And that he, you know, there was something liberating for him and that came through in that Cavett, you know, the way he talked about it with such enthusiasm about, well, can't you all see this, like. This is like. Yeah, it's very nice.

[Podcast Host]

And, yeah, it's of the thread that you see with Getting Better. Used to be cruel to my woman. Whoever wrote that line, it is an explicit depiction of I used to be that, but I'm better now and I'm doing the best that I can.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, yeah. No, it was really. It was a very nice. I think I'm gonna watch that later. It might put me in a good mood. It's. Yeah. And then they sang the song. I don't remember. At the time that was. When was Dick Cavett on? Was he on in prime time? I don't remember. Probably. No, it was late night, so it was like 11:30.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, something like. Yeah, right. 11:30, East Coast.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I remember being on in the, like, mid evening. No, I guess that couldn't be enough. Yeah. All right.

[Podcast Host]

So different iterations of shows, but the one that I remember was definitely Late Night. And I think by design, he had wider latitude to get into more controversial things.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

So remember the guy that died on his show? Did you ever know that story?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

What?

[Podcast Host]

There was a health food guy he had on who died on the set.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Who was the guy who. With the grains. Who was all that.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Who? Yeah, yeah. What was his name again? I do remember.

[Podcast Host]

I don't remember. It wasn't Yul Gibbons, but it was somebody along those lines that. Next thing you know, he's hearing a death rattle.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. But I wonder, when he. When they performed a song on Cavett, was there any pushback at the time or. Or. I don't remember. I don't know.

[Podcast Host]

It would have been cool to see, like, a sweep of the audience, to see any blackfaces in the crowd going, this or.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right, right. Well, he had. But when I got, you know, he had already talked about all the support he got from the black community.

[Podcast Host]

Totally.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. Certain elements of the black community. Anyway. So, yeah, if you think about it, it was actually very well done. The way he. He had all that stuff ready to, like, plane it and inoculate himself.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, right. So if there had been an Oprah of the time, if there had been a powerful TV female woman of color to champion him, I think he would have been pretty golden at that moment.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, but that didn't exist, you know?

[Podcast Host]

No, it didn't exist.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

It only exists now. Right?

[Podcast Host]

Two out of the curve. Yeah, you're right.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah. I wonder what, like, Oprah would think about it, you know, like this. Not about this. Well, about the song. I mean, there are two Issues here. There's the song, and there's the omission of the song from the new collection. So there's sort of two different issues. But it'd be interesting to know how Oprah, Whoopi Goldberg, Kitty Oliver, you know.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah, maybe more them than Oprah. Cause Oprah, she's still the same person who gave us Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz. And I don't know how much of a risk taker she is at heart. You know, she's got something to lose, and therefore she's protective of it. It's easy to go after James Fry and use him as a pinata.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

What did you say?

[Podcast Host]

It's easy to use James Fry's a pinata to beat up for plagiarizing his memoir.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I am gonna say something in defense of Oprah. I've always thought she was a force for good in the world. Now, as far as her, you know, with Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz, I mean, I think she was taken in by them like a lot of people.

[Podcast Host]

Were, you know, still waiting for the renunciation.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, that's true. She hasn't renounced them. Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

Yeah. Where's her sexy Sadie?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Oprah's a force for good in the world. I've always thought so. I mean, she's made some mistakes as human being do, but she's very human. I mean, I think she's very much a human being. She has an interesting backstory, too. I don't know. I. I like her. I'm on Team Oprah. But, yeah, she's elevated. Some people who maybe did not deserve to be elevated, that's for sure.

[Podcast Host]

But somebody in media. Yes, it would be. What's interesting is, and this was the thing I expected, before I knew they were cutting the song, I had anticipated there was trouble around it. And my kids, I bought for them when they were young the DVD sets of Looney Tunes. And there are a few. These preambles in front of them from Whoopi Goldberg, explaining the context of the racism you were about to see in these cartoons. Made in the 30s and 40s. I was thinking, yes, this is the way to handle it. Put some kind of disclaimer up front so you understand. You're saying that was made in different times than the ones you're living in now. And this is where it was coming from. This is the context.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Right. I mean, this box set, I'm sure it's gonna have the beautiful beetle packaging, as all the things do, with a little booklet. Why couldn't Sean have written a few paragraphs? Sort of like what you're describing. In other words, putting this in its historical context and. Yeah, I mean, Yeah, I mean there.

[Podcast Host]

Is or Questlove or Whoopee or Kitty Oliver. Somebody would cred to disarm this before it becomes a thing.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, disarm. That's a good word for. Yeah, yeah. Disarm. Yeah. I don't know. I'm eager now to see what the reaction, if there's any. There may be none. You know, again, we're talking about a very small number of people who care about it. I mean, how much is this set gonna cost, do you think?

[Podcast Host]

For a set, we're talking 12 discs, like three Blu Rays and nine CDs. So I would think at least a couple hundred for all the bells and whistles and there will be smaller iterations of it. But to get everything. Yeah, you're talking about what has to be a deep pocketed constituency, presumably a boomers, because this is not going to be of interest to the casual Lenin fan. Oh, I think I'm going to dip my toe into John and Yoko world. This is not the place to start.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Some number of like, you know, millennials or Gen Xers, whatever, who have like a Lenin thing and want it. I mean, you know, there'll be. It might have a small market outside of boomers. But yes, you're right, it's gonna be mostly.

[Podcast Host]

It's not the gateway drug, right?

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

No, definitely not. Definitely not. But with that song, it could have been more of a gateway drug. Like that's the thing. Like. No, I was actually telling my grandson about this song because Messy and I just wanted to, you know, Anyway, you know, he. He sort of got it. But not that he gonna become a big John Lennon follower. But yeah, I mean, I think this song, it still has power. It has latent power that by taking it off the record, it robbed it of.

[Podcast Host]

Absolutely. And if not now, when are they going to wait another 50 years when anybody who might be objecting to it is not around to push back? I don't know.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. Yeah, I mean, they were afraid of. I put it like this. They were afraid of offending, you know, offending somebody and they just erred on the side of caution and made a big mistake.

[Podcast Host]

I wonder if two versions will ever be reissued.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Well, what would the purpose be? I mean, for the music? I mean, I don't know.

[Podcast Host]

I don't know. To completists who might not have it, who want everything, who are curious about this Thing that was once controversial, not because of anything on the vinyl. I don't know. I don't know why I ever was, honestly, but it was.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

I mean, it's hard to know what the future will bring in any way, but certainly in terms of how people will look at all this. Are people gonna be still writing about the Beatles and Lennon? I mean, it seems like so much from another world right now, you know, like another time and.

[Podcast Host]

But doesn't seem like the sort of perception of offensiveness is ephemeral.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes.

[Podcast Host]

What I thought about was. What was his name, Ashcroft? Was that the attorney general that draped the nude statues at the Justice Department.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Or something like that? Yeah, yeah.

[Podcast Host]

I mean, that. That was just ridiculousness. They'd been there for decades and they're going to continue to be there after his. He's long forgotten. Just because you are offended, it just makes you look like a doofus. But that's why I wonder if that's the way history is going to view the perception of caution.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Now, somebody I was talking to about this made an announcement, compared it a little bit to what's happening at the Smithsonian. But as we talked it through, we realized it's kind of the. What Universal did by omitting that song. It's kind of the inverse of that, in a way. In other words, with malice, they are removing the role of African Americans from American history to, like, take them out of the American story with malice. But in this case, they are censoring something in an age where people offend. So, you know, in other words. I don't even say it like that, but in other words, they're taking out this song to not offend. Right. So in other words, it's like they're both censorship and they both have to do with race, but they're coming from.

[Podcast Host]

Very different places, sort of mirror images of each other.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yeah, it's almost like the inverse. I don't know. I mean, it's a really strange moment in history. I don't know.

[Podcast Host]

We've been condemned to live in interesting times.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Yes. Yes. I feel. Well, yeah. I mean, I feel like I lived through interesting times already. Like, I don't. More interesting times. I'd like to be bored. Right. I'd like to have no big surprises unless they're positive, you know, but, you know, you know, having grown up at a time, you know, witnessing so many good things happen and change and culture and then to, you know, to see now how quickly it can all just disappear, you know, with the stroke of a pen, it's very disconcerting and disorienting in a way, which is the Beatles and thinking about things, beetle things. Beatles becomes like a refuge in a way, you know, and it will prevail. I think it will prevail. And everything sounds as good, if not better, as it did then, and reliably so. I always talk about how they were this reliable source of joy. Right. Like that's still true, you know. So, yeah, it's good that they're in the world.

[Podcast Host]

Absolutely. Something about the Beatles Created and hosted by Robert Rodriguez, executive producer Rick Way, title song performed by the Corgis.

[Guest Expert (possibly Candy Leonard)]

Something.

[Podcast Host]

About the Beatles is an evergreen podcast. New season, new chaos in college football. Big stage, big opportunity. This Labor Day weekend. The wildness lives on ABC, ESPN and the all new ESPN app. What a way to start. Featuring top 10 teams like Clemson, Notre Dame, Alabama and LSU. And Bill Belichick's debut at North Carolina. It's so special when these teams collide. Don't miss a lineup filled with electric matchups. Welcome back to College Football Kickoff Week presented by Modelo. Labor Day weekend on ESPN and abc. Also available to stream on the all new ESPN Apple.