top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 137 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Imagine getting cancelled in 2026 for being a billionaire's bitch.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    dint he grow up wealthy at least thats what i heard. of anything rich children who grew up with rich parents, never want to be "poor"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    There's very few people who have made it to where he is in the music industry who didn't. Not for any particularly nefarious reason (although there's usually a bit of nepotism involved as these things often go), but because working in the music industry fucking sucks. You make almost no money when coming up and balancing a full time job with recording and playing shows means you miss out on opportunities all the time. Coming from a rich family who can support you while you focus on music full time drastically increases your chances.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Compensation in the music business is only adequate if you're far out on the right tail of the distribution. Having backing from someone with deep pockets as you get to that point definitely helps.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Maybe not wealthy, but definitely boujie. Privately educated, and daddy runs an art gallery. Not really a rough-handed son of the proletariat.

    of anything rich children who grew up with rich parents, never want to be “poor”

    I grew up poor. Didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. I never want to be poor again. But if I had to, I'd probably survive.

    You can want to change the system that makes people poor, and still prefer living indoors.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 315 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (83 children)

    Kraft said in a statement on Instagram: “I have dedicated much of my life to building bridges between all people. I believe deeply that all lives are worth protecting.

    That's like saying 'all lives matter' in response to the Black Lives Matter movement; it's disrespectful of the point being made.

  • source
  • hideshow 83 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 1 month ago (66 children)

    It’s like thinking reverse racism is a thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 66 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    He very literally tried to pull a "I can't be racist, I have black friends" because he's worked with a couple people who happen to be Palestinian

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I married one, and I'd never say that. Even after decades of marriage, having learned the language and having lived in the Middle East for years, there are still some unwritten norms and cultural differences that occasionally take each of us by surprise and lead to misunderstandings. We muddle through. Our kids are more fluently bicultural.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    I've lived in a place (and visited a couple others) where being a white person meant being subjected to suspicion and discrimination. It wasn't reverse racism, it was xenophobia and plain old garden-variety racism. Being on the receiving end was highly instructive, as were the supportive comments such as "but we don't mean you, you're one of the good ones." There were also cases of extreme discrimination and abusive behavior towards minorities that, to an outsider like me, seemed almost exactly like the majority population.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 1 month ago (61 children)

    But it is a thing... People can absolutely be racist against white people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 61 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    You are technically correct; people can absolutely be racist against white people.

    Now I'll explain why you're being downvoted anyway.

    "Black Lives Matter" became a slogan because police disproportionately target black people. They stop and question black people at a far higher rate than is warranted by actual crimes, they arrest people at a far higher rate than white people, and they kill black people at a far higher rate than they kill black people.

    The statement is very obviously not just a literal statement on the value of human life; it's an accusation that police seem to think black lives don't matter. "All Lives Matter" simply pretends to be ignorant of the entire background and reasoning behind the phrase.

    Israeli's have been massacring Palestinians and leveling their cities. They have inflicted orders of magnitude more suffering on Palestinians in the last years than Hamas has during its entire existence. The only way to equate the two is if you believe that Palestinian lives are worth significantly less than Israeli lives, and yes, that would be racist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    I think people assume I'm saying that white people are victims of systemic racism, which is not at all what I said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I don't have the sociological definition of racism at my fingertips, but IIRC it includes the need for a power imbalance, which is generally why people push back when folks say that minority groups can be racist against against white people. Our entire country was (arguably still is to a large degree) set up to where there is a huge power imbalance in favor of white people.

    If you just want to make the very real point that white people are victims of bigotry also sometimes, rather than get into this repetitive debate about whether there can be racism against white people, IMO you can just say "bigotry" or "racial prejudice" and carry the same message you intend to without having to have this tired debate about whether white people can experience racism.

    Unless you aren't tired of the tired debate, but I know I sure am.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    Just to make things even more complicated, there can be a power imbalance at a macro level that favors group A over group B, whereas at a more micro level, there can be situations where the power balance is reversed. I'm a white kid who grew up in a barrio (long story) and I experienced that at an early age. I got the shit beaten out of me many times because my face didn't fit, as well as being on the receving end of disparaging and sometimes threatening comments (especially when I was dating one of the girls from the neighborhood).

    So I think you're onto something with the terminological distinctions you're making. Equating "racism" with "systemic racism" gives a lot more truth to the "white people can't experience racism" claim. But along with systemic racism, there's ad-hoc racism and related forms of bigotry that can run counter to the prevalent bias.

    Still, if my name were Gonzalez instead of my very common Irish surname, and I applied for a university place or (even more) a job, I wouldn't be at all surprised to be treated more negatively, even with the same qualifications. I've seen it happen to my friends and neighbors.

    There's a whole, long discussion to be had about intersectionality, and about the fundamental incommensurability of the many possible axes of privilege and oppression. I'm not motivated to get into that now, but undertanding it makes some otherwise counter-intuitive observations make more sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    No you said reverse racism is a thing

    It's not.

    Because that implies racism only works from white->non-white. Which definitionally, is not true. This entire concept is itself, racist.

    The actual reverse if racism would be like... Super equitable treatment of everyone, it someone. Not swapping the direction of races doing the biggoting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -8 points 1 month ago

    This is like having a conversation about menstruation, and then men being like, "I get cuts sometimes".

    No one fucking cares, if you're talking about white racism, you're just being self centered.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 1 month ago

    People don't care, they make up whatever they want to feel good about themselves. The definition of "racism" has no specific race, it's like murder, it's murder if xyz criteria are met.

    If an African American doesn't hire ANYONE based off race/skin color, it's racism, period. Even if it's other African Americas. Caucasians aren't magically excluded regardless of how bad you want them to be. Typically, at least in my experience in education, most African Americans are happy with racism as long as it's in their benifit, because they have some weird ass belief that it's impossible for them to be racist somehow.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 1 month ago* (3 children)

    Yeah that's just called racism. White people don't get a special prefix when it happens to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    That's basically my point, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 month ago

    It isn't at all. Your "point" is that you're somehow unable to understand the meaning of the word racism. Look and think about the word, it's not "Anyone but whiteism". The skin color or whatever else doesn't matter, racism is racism no matter who it's against. It's just astounding how fucking dumb you gotta be to reply like you have to a comment chain about "all lives matter" in response to BLM, all you've managed to do is show everyone you're just as stupid and ignorant as the people who say that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    But it is a thing... People can absolutely be racist against white people.

    It's not a thing. If someone hates another person based on their race, that's racism. This idea that it only applies to hate towards black people is very much a US only issue. The rest of the world understands that racism towards any person is wrong.

    Technically you could argue that "reverse racism" would be explicitly liking someone based entirely on their race, and nothing else. But even that's a stupid way of looking at it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    would be explicitly liking someone based entirely on their race, and nothing else

    That's definitely a thing: fetishizing people because of their race or some other characteristic. I know some weebs, for example, who get deep into that groove. I also have known people who have a kink about having Black sexual partners. And I know two Black women who each like to date white guys and do roleplay with them that involves racial abuse. Both are upper middle class and highly educated. I find all of those fetishes weird, reductive and creepy. But maybe that's just me. Others might draw their lines elsewhere.

    I also know couples where the partners are from very different ethnicities, and they're not all weird about it. For example, I didn't get with my wife because of her ethnicity, it was about her intelligence, character and (OK, I'll admit it) strikingly good looks. I knew nothing about her culture at the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    That's definitely a thing: fetishizing people because of their race or some other characteristic

    I know that's a thing, but would you call that "reverse racism"? That's the point I was trying to make, that such a term is ridiculous.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    The rest of the world understands that racism towards any person is wrong.

    They understand that it's just called racism, but it's not universally seen as wrong. There are a lot of countries with significant racial prejudice, besides the US. Thinking it just doesn't exist elsewhere is naive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Thinking it just doesn’t exist elsewhere is naive.

    That's not what they said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    They said everywhere else thinks it's wrong. I guess what I said technically isn't the same, but if everyone thought it was wrong it wouldn't exist. Regardless, my point still stands that it isn't seen as wrong everywhere else either. There are a lot of places where it's seen as normal, or even good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Their point was that thinking there's a one way directionality associated with the term between specific races is a seemingly unique US perspective. Elsewhere that directionality doesn't exist and it's understood that it can go any direction, even if the bigotry exists there too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Yes, they corrected what they said, but the original comment says it's seen as wrong everywhere, and it isn't. I'm not going to debate this any further. I don't know why you're arguing with me. I agreed that it's just called racism in my first comment. What is your goal?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    You doubling down on being wrong, and me pointing it out, is not me arguing with you. There's no edit marker on that comment. Keep digging that hole.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Yes, it still says everyone thinks racism is wrong! I agreed it's just called racism! I just disagreed that everyone else thinks it's wrong. Is this incorrect?

    Also, are you using an alt to downvote me and upvote yourself? There's no way someone is following this this closely. Fucking weird for you are.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    They understand that it's just called racism, but it's not universally seen as wrong.

    That's actually a valid point. But I was speaking in a more general sense, in that literally nowhere else in the world will you hear the phrase "reverse racism".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (9 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (5 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    you are confusing racism and prejudice, but from your doubling down, seems like you're confused quite often.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

    I'm not the one who is confused.

    I'm not saying white people are victims of systemic racism, but individuals can absolutely be racist against white people because of their skin color.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    And I’m not saying you’re technically wrong, but you’re “all lives matter”ing it. It’s not the topic here so you bringing it up implies that you really want it to be heard regardless of the topic at hand and it makes you sound like a racist prick.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Not just read the room, they are a moron.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    You don't have to be rude, they are literally using the word racism as defined by dictionaries. There are two separate definitions usually listed, one is belief in a races superiority over others, the other is the systemic bias against a racial group. Since 2020 at least it's been common that people have used it to mean specifically only the second definition and use other terms like racial prejudice for things like prejudice against white people but it's used that way still plenty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    When people mean the systemic part, they include the word systemic next to the word racism. You can't just assume it's implied and get pissed when people don't understand your made a last mental shortcut combining two things.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    I thought reverse racism was like.. when you overcorrect for discrimination and end up discriminating against white people? Not just being racist against white people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (9 children)

    No, they actually can't be. Because "white" is not a race.

    Look up the history of that term. Most of the people who are white now would not have been 100 years ago. And still no one can agree whether hispanic means white or not.

    ETA: The whole idea of race is a social construct and a fantasy with no basis in reality, much less biology. By stating that "white" is not a race, I did not mean to imply that the idea of race is legitimate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I did not mean to imply that the idea of race is legitimate.

    Yeah. Race, in general, is a fundamentally unsound way to categorize people. Humans are clinal in every single characteristic associated with race. Attempting to boil a multidimensional continuum down to a binary distinction is a fool's errand.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    What's your point? Do you really think I was asserting that "black" is a race?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    The point is that racism is hate because of race. People that are oppressed by a certain race hate that race because of the oppression, not the race. It's not racism by definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    Hating people who have nothing to do with your oppression because of their skin color is racist. Full stop.

    It's like saying men can't be raped because women are the majority of victims.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    No not full stop. That's not an equivalent comparison at all and it really disturbs me that so many people agree with you. What an egregious oversimplification.

    A crime is a crime. I'm not saying oppression gives a get out of jail free card. Hurting an innocent person is still wrong, but being afraid of an unknown person who is a member of a race that is predominantly cruel to you? Understandable. Calling out that race for bad behavior is also acceptable, wouldn't you agree? As a member of an oppressed race you exist in a world not too dissimilar to the movie "They Live."

    How can you know who is and isn't your ally? It's safer to assume they aren't.

    There is a lot of nuance to this very complicated subject.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago

    Calling out that race for bad behavior is also acceptable, wouldn't you agree?

    I'm not who you are replying to but that sounds racist and I don't agree you should attribute bad behavior to a race. There's better and more accurate ways to attribute bad behavior, basing it on racial identities is inherently racist in my book, and inherently misleading.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    People that are oppressed by a certain race hate that race because of the oppression, not the race.

    ...

    Calling out that race for bad behavior is also acceptable

    Here we have ladies and gents, a perfect example of a racist that thinks he is not racist.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    Calling out that race for bad behavior is also acceptable, wouldn’t you agree?

    No, that is pure nonsense. It is not a "race" who is oppressing anybody. It is certain groups of people, usually a political and economical elite who are doing the oppressing. Conflating it with race (which is not even a real concept) is the epitome of racism and directing efforts at the wrong reasons. Oppressors love that kind of bigoted stuff, because it causes people to miss the actual factors of oppression.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Hurting an innocent person is still wrong, but being afraid of an unknown person who is a member of a race that is predominantly cruel to you? Understandable. Calling out that race for bad behavior is also acceptable, wouldn't you agree?

    No it's not acceptable it's just racism 101. A lot of racist white people think the exact same way about some minorities. Also systemic racism doesn't need you to be white to keep it alive. Here in france there is a lot of racism between minorities. Following your logic it ok for them to hate each other? That's just dumb

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    I hate how the Right can't understand context.

    "What? You think only Black Lives Matter? ALL LIVES MATTER! Wait I'm the bad guy for saying all lives matter? What the fuck?" - The Right said not understanding what Black Lives Matter means

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Tbf the left has always been shit at messaging

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    israel lives matter more to him. he became salty and got a bunch of other stadiums to ban macklemore. Oh and Kraft is on EPstein files too. apparently ed shareens manager is also in it?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago

    the zionist entity sheeran is so cancelled at this point they have hired pikers chinese producers for content and the investment in the gaza re-education tunnels is almost complete

    my hope is that with this cultural victory pop folk rock will be truely nine to five only

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 49 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    "removed from the airways" at one radio station in Ireland

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I was just in the Republic, and had a couple good pub conversations about Sheeran. When I was attempting a nuanced take on the subject, one guy interrupted me to say "Well, before you get into it more, you do realize he's an unmusical cunt, right?"

    But mainly, people were out demonstrating against Trump's visit. "PEDO FUCK OFF" was one of the more concise placards.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 80 points 1 month ago

    Everything I've ever learned about Ed Sheeran has been against my will.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago

    The absence of Ed Sheeran songs is barely distinguishable from their presence.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Thank you Palestine and Macklemore for standing up to keep this Zionist scum off the radio 🙏 now only if YouTube and Spotify would grow some balls

    😂 as if

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    and now we are made aware indirectly that kraft is also in the epstein files, as is one of shareens managers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Oh no, poor Epstein has been implicated with Ed Sheeran?

    It’s always the last one you expect

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago

    How long until Ed Sheeran starts his "Why I left the left" grift?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    29 comments in c/world view that post
    1 comment in c/music@lemmy.world view that post