this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
952 points (90.8% liked)

memes

10163 readers
2449 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 96 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I think this is more appropriate for the new Starbucks CEO.

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 58 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] ChilledPeppers@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

Starbucks ceo is richer, and a ~~men~~ man, we should make more memes about him.

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

and a men

Man

Men

And why would he desserve more memes if he's a man ?

Every difference in treatment between two people based on gender is sexism

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Every difference in treatment between two people based on gender is sexism

And exclusively focusing on Taylor when there is recent examples of others doing much worse is a great example of this. Such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Leonardo DiCaprio who all use their private jets in just as wasteful horrendous ways. Much like how all the star wars fans decided Kathleen Kennedy or "Darth Kennedy" was the main reason the new movies were bad, ignoring the directors and writers with more control.

I'm not here to defend Taylor, couldn't care less about her, not at all a fan and fuck all billionaires. But you have to ignore centuries of history, gender discrimination and patriarchal control to cite sexism like this. There is a rich history of double standards and women being criticized for the exact same thing men do. The overwhelming majority of private jets are used by men in their 50's, but somehow Taylor Swift is the eternal meme fodder for it?

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yup. So many shitty billionaires out there, but they focus on one of the decent ones.

https://abc7chicago.com/taylor-swift-gives-bonuses-eras-tour-bonus-truck-drivers-net-worth/13588228/

[–] ChilledPeppers@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

My idea is that: 100 billionaires make bullshit with their private jets: I sleep. Taylor swift make buillshit with her jet: Real shit?

We are only clowning on the women billionaire and ignoring all others who do similar shit.

(and about the men vs man thing, english is my second language, I meant man)

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The glaring difference to me is that Taylor tries to project an image of being a better billionaire. And, in a lot of ways, she IS, so it's more glaring when she shits the bed with something as dumb as a private jet. She does philanthropy, she fights back against the music industry's bullshit, she's even pretty outspoken about the climate, but she can't ground her jet unless absolutely necessary?

She's still a billionaire. She still sucks. But she does marginally better than the rest. Now step up the rest of the way. Until then, criticisms are valid.

Regarding man vs men, the singular vs plural doesn't matter. It's that none of this is gendered. Starbucks CEO (I think it's telling that I don't respect him enough to know his name) sucks. Gates sucks. Buffet sucks. Swift sucks.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

it's the gender bias in attention paid.

when was the last time you thought about the ceos of GE, boeing, Home Depot etc., who have been doing the same shit for decades.

She treats her people decently, something I really can't say for a lot of other billionaires.

https://abc7chicago.com/taylor-swift-gives-bonuses-eras-tour-bonus-truck-drivers-net-worth/13588228/

[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Every difference in treatment between two people based on gender is sexism

That's what I told the gynecologist when he told me to see an urologist to check my testes.

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

If this is a joke, then good one !

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago

More recent too.

I just had this shared with me somewhere else and posted it unchanged.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Only because he's a man will I do so. Filthy men...with their penises, and beards!

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Not all men have beards. Some of us have wives, boyfriends, and husbands.

[–] mriormro@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

and a men

Fucking what?

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm a one-hate one-love machine. I can't hate multiple people at the same time. My heart just gets confused if I try, and then starts flirting with nihilism.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Embrace nihilism full on, and start flirting with absurdism.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

nihilism? nah, that literally adds nothing.
absurdism? oh, you betcha

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Depends what you mean by adding nothing.

I think nihilism is a pretty concrete position to be in. 2 billion years from now, nothing we've done will matter or likely be remembered. On a cosmological scale, that makes our lives pretty pointless. Thats nihilism.

Nihilism doesn't have to be bad, though. In fact, there's no good or bad in that statement. Just "will matter" and "won't matter". Absurdism is embracing the fact that nothing matters, and doing anyway. Why? Who knows. It tends to be how people stay happy. Do because if you don't, well.. that's pretty much it isn't it?

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

Cosmologically? yes nihilism makes sense.

On a human scale? No, your actions and inactions have rippling consequences on the world around you, and to reject these consequences is to reject responsibility for sharing a world with others, which in my opinion is a selfish and childish thing to do.

Absurdism seems more rational than nihilism on a human scale, since it admits that the world is chaos and to fully embrace this entropy as a means to not take the consequences of life too seriously.

Absurdism is a fantastic coping mechanism for the harsh realities of life. Nihilism really does not accomplish anything, in my opinion.

[–] exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

True.

I'm very much opposed to and sad about an international pop star and apparent progressive taking a private jet all the time.

But there's two things at play that should be differentiated.

  1. The role model aspect. She has millions of fans that look up to her. She could lead by example and use different means of transportation.
  2. She's obviously a unique figure. She's not replaceable or generic in the position she's at. Her "position" cannot be replaced by someone else as would be possible with the Starbucks CEO. She's not "some CEO" taking a Jet to work and thereby normalizing this as a habit for CEOs". Right now there are few if any other celebrities with her status l, so she stands for herself.

The precedent of Starbucks CEO commuting by jet is much more of a blueprint that might be applied to other CEOs. Or already is. I don't even know his name FFS. So he's making a precedent that a lot of other people could readily adapt.

I don't want to excuse anything. I just think that it would be more beneficial to attack CEOs for taking private jets. There's a lot more of them. They areuch more susceptible to the pressure if the companies is seen as a polluter than Taylor Swift might be. She's much more independent than any CEO. She doesn't have to worry if the board of directors or the shareholders are going to replace her if her if her habits are becoming a PR problem. So our energy might be more productively applied elsewhere.

I'm still sad about a seemingly progressive and apparently Intelligent pop star like her flying that much.