With the litany of once-attractive '90s-era actresses emerging from the woodwork to accuse Harvey Weinstein of everything from rubbing one out onto a potted plant to full-on non-consensual lovemaking (by an acquaintance), it was only a matter of time before some enterprising journalist called for a Harvey Weinstein moment in hip-hop. Maybe someone from DJ Booth, whatever that site is.
I'm gonna go ahead and argue that hip-hop doesn't need a Harvey Weinstein moment, for the following reasons.
For starters, hip-hop already had its Harvey Weinstein moment. Maybe six months or a year ago, LA Reid was let go from Epic Records (Michael Jackson's old label) after allegations surfaced that he tried to score with his assistant by making her share a hotel room with him on a business trip and then trying to get her to lie on the bed with him and give him a hug.
Reid was the only black head of a major label, and the only person I can think of who would engage in that level of tomfoolery. Russell Simmons, for example, who once contemplated starting his own modeling agency with Brett Ratner so they could fuck all the models, hasn't been involved with rap music in any meaningful way since the 1990s.
Rappers don't count, since it's not like rappers run the music industry. Some rappers, like Rawse, have their own vanity imprints, but they're probably not even allowed to sign an artist without some CAC at the label signing off on it. If a rapper tried to force a female rapper to give him a blowski in order to sign to his fake record label, it would arguably be the fault of the parent company. Any settlement reached would be paid by Atlantic Records, not Maybach Music Group.
There aren't very many female rappers anyway, and we don't need the ones we have. Nicki Minaj hasn't been worth a shit in years. Cardi B recently became the first female rapper to have a number one record since Lauryn Hill way TF back in the late '90s, but hopefully her moment has already passed. Sexual harassment in hip-hop of the casting couch variety could easily be alleviated by not signing any female artists.
You do hear a lot of stories about the child gangbanger rapper du jour beating his pregnant girlfriend, raping a woman, being implicated in multiple homicides, so on and so forth, none of which I personally approve of. But the kids who buy this shit, er, stream it on YouTube on an endless loop, thus manipulating the increasingly useless Billboard charts, don't seem to give a shit.
Take for example XXXTentacion. A few weeks ago, his album 17, named for the age of consent here in Missouri (don't worry, R. Kelly can't read this), debuted at number two on the Billboard 200, behind only an album by the relatively acceptable Lil Uzi Vert, this despite a number of think pieces in which it was argued, or implied, that he should be deprived of his constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech just because he allegedly put a shoe on his girlfriend.
Not that I approve of putting a shoe on one's girlfriend, in most situations, but isn't that why we have law enforcement. They're not just here to occasionally kill black people for no apparent reason, to make white people feel more safe. If XXXTentacion breaks the law, toss his ass in jail. I'm sure the TIs will find a suitable replacement by that afternoon. The lifecycle of an LCD rapper these days is only a few months long anyway. No need for a hard-hitting exposé in the New Yorker written by Woody Allen's estranged son.
Ironically, it's hipster music journalists' fault that hip-hop is so inundated with disturbed children. They created a market for child gangbanger rap by pretending to like music by artists who reinforce all of the worst stereotypes about black people, for irony purposes. If only they'd go back to whatever they listened to before they "discovered" rap music, in 2008, these kids would be out of a job and this wouldn't be an issue. They'd probably still be killing people and, worse, hitting women, but it wouldn't be publicized, so we could easily pretend it didn't exist.