response to recent trends rule
here are some hyper-polluting individuals:
- the Rolling Stones’ Boeing 767 (5,046 tonnes of CO2)
- Lawrence Stroll (1,512 flights)
- Thirty-nine jets linked to 30 Russian oligarchs – (30,701 tonnes of CO2)
relevant quote:
But I will say this, a movement can't get along without a devil, and across the whole political spectrum there is a misogynistic tendency to choose a female devil, whether it's Anita Bryant, Hillary Clinton, Marie Antoinette, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or J.K. Rowling [or Taylor Swift]. And there's always gonna be people who seize on any opportunity to be misogynistic. So I would advise trans people and our allies [or environmentalists] to keep in mind, that J.K. Rowling [Taylor Swift] is not the final boss of transphobia [anti-environmentalism]. She's not our devil. The devil is the Republican Party, the Conservative Party.
—Natalie Wynn (emphasis and bracket text mine)
edit: if you can’t respond to this without using the c*nt expletive it is not helping your case lmao. mods are we okay with this? in any case, please don’t feed the trolls.
edit 2/FAQ: “but why did she threaten legal action against that college kid though?” still shitty, but refer to this comment for a good explanation of the context behind that decision.
She only threatened legal action since those memes started before when her flight movements got the attention of the right in an attempt to make her less credible of a voice speaking out against trump. And knowing how batshit insane trump cultists can be and how she’s basically the single most hated person of his base I’m not surprised that she feared for her security. Those records were public for years but the legal action only happened after someone created that meme and even fox news suddenly cared about plane emissions…
[…] For Swift, this is legitimate fear. I don't know if you've ever experienced actual fear for your life, but it's crippling, and it effects your psyche. To experience that on a daily basis because of an app? You bet your goddamn ass I'm going to talk to my lawyers about what my options are.
sources/timeline for the above:
- mid 2022, the media begins scrutinizing Swift for her flying patterns
- in response, Swift’s jet drops from 19 to just over 2 flights per month
- her flights pick up slightly with the start of her massive Eras tour but still significantly less than pre-July 2022
- December 6, 2023, Swift embroiled in election conspiracy theory, basically making her MAGA’s enemy number one.
- January 30, 2024, Taylor Swift gets rid of one private jet
- February 6, 2024, news outlets first report on the cease and desist.
Stop trying to make this about Swift being a woman.
She's getting all this attention about it because her legal team sent a cease and desist letter to the guy tracking her jet threatening him with legal action over priding publically available tracking information.
Na, she is getting this attention because some very powerful people, who benefit from producing a lot of greenhouse gases, would prefer that everyone be mad at T Swift instead of them.
Or, the much more likely thing that private jet usage has become a big talking point on the inter etc recently and swift having by far the biggest jet emission footprint of any celebrity.
Oh yeah, I agree, it is an interesting talking point. But If you have the goal of reducing green house gas emission, is memeing on T Swift the best target for that? Don't get me wrong it is hilarious. I just get really frustrated when people say they are doing it for the environment, when what they are doing is mostly ineffectual and playing into the desires of the major polluters (who are very wealthy).
So in my mind, either a large group of online environmentalist have decided to be less effective at working towards their goal for no reason. Or there is a significate astroturfing thing going on here. Given that oil companies have done this kind of thing multiple times in the past, I think I have a reasonable assumption. I smell bullshit and I am calling it.
How does this make her "actions wrong"? Because you disagree?
Yes, it's legal for him to do what he's doing, but it is also legal (and completely reasonable) for Swift to challenge that right because she fears for her safety. This is literally what our legal system is for.
There are a lot of insane people out there (and most of them tracking Swift's plane at this moment are right wing psychopaths that wish her harm). I really can't fucking blame her for wanting to do something about it.
So you think it's perfectly moral for the ultra wealthy to abuse the legal system to threaten and bully random people into submission because they are ruining the billionaires image?
And again to reiterate, this is all publically available information, anyone who wants to track her jet can do so without the tracker that guy set up. She has no legal standing in her actions.
Lol yeah bud, that's what I said.
Dude, I understand it's public information. I understand that current law (probably rightfully) allows air traffic to be tracked, including private jets.
I was simply doing something that you're clearly incapable of, and empathizing (you remember empathy right?) with her position. A position that is markedly different than Musk's, given that she receives a constant stream of legitimate death threats from people known to be violent; she has valid reason to fear for her life right now. I think I would probably do similar in such a situation.
I don't think it's "wrong" for her to seek to do what she can to protect herself, and that includes this.
The argument that "what they're doing is legal" is pretty stupid too... I'm not even saying that I disagree that it should be legal, but how do you think laws change? The boundaries of them get tested in courts. This is not an abuse of the legal system, this is using it as intended.
That is in fact, literarily, what you are saying and what you are continuing to say in the rest of your comment.
Oh wont somebody please empathise with the poor billionaires that are using the insane wealth to bully people for criticising their insane over-use of private jets.
You guys are doing actual mental backflips to try and make Taylor Swift the victim here and its honestly just kind of sad.
And those people could find that same PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE information even without the guy's tracker. So even if he did take it down, she is in literally no better position when it comes to stalkers.
Literally all getting him to take down the website does is stop people from criticising how much she uses her jet, which hurts her image. Thats it.
Like if she ACTUALLY cared that much about being tracked and her safety she could just charter private jets instead of owning her own. That way no one could track her. But she doesnt, because its not about her safety, its about her image.
Lmao swift stans are actually neurotic.
FYI (because apparently this needs to be said), I've never once purposefully listened to a Taylor Swift song, and besides maybe two, I couldn't even tell you if a pop song currently playing is her or not. That's how little I care about this person's art/music. My feelings toward her can be described as, at most, ambivalent. I'm definitely neurotic though, but that's unrelated to this subject.
All I'm doing is empathizing with another human being. Billionaires might be (for the most part, though I'm not sure I can imagine a more ethical way to become one than how she has) awful people, but they're still people and they deserve basic human rights such as: not being in 24/7 fear for the lives of you and your loved ones because fascists are mad that she told young people to vote.
I'm not even advocating for taking down the site or making the info no longer publicly available. I'm literally just putting myself in her shoes and rationalizing why she did what she did and understanding that I might have done the same.
We seem to be having two completely different conversations here, which I guess I shouldn't be surprised about given that you clearly can't comprehend nuance. Your clear hatred for this woman is clouding your ability to be a decent human. Do better.
And all im saying is you can empathise with her without excusing her doing something immoral like harassing an innocent student.
Also you keep talking about empathy but refuse to even consider empathising with the guy being harassed by a billionaire celebrity.
Lol yeah dude that's definitely "all you were saying". You're being such a reasonable interlocutor 🙄
She's not harassing an innocent student. I don't think it really matters to her who created it. She is just doing the one thing she can do that would maybe give her a fraction of a feeling of security back into her life. Something that I bet most of us, including you, would do. A student being involved is irrelevant.
And yeah, I do empathize with that guy as well. Assuming they didn't create the app specifically for these types of people to be able to harass and endanger her more easily. Which he may have, I don't really know all the details.
Isn't that crazy? Empathizing with both people in a situation? Wild right?
Also, this pretending that it's about giving her shit because of the environmental impact, give me a fucking break. Let's not waste everyone's time with that bullshit. Conservatives only "believe" in climate change, when they can use it as a cudgel against someone they feel threatened by. Actually a textbook fascist move (this isn't a joke, it really is).
and
are contradictory statements
You are bending over backwards to excuse what she is doing. and its really just kind of sad.
Like i said last time. If she actually cared so much, she would just charter a jet instead. That would literally solve her whole problem, no one could track her and she would be perfectly safe. But you keep ignoring this point because it doesnt fit dumbass position you've argued yourself into where Taylor is just an innocent girl whose scared for her life 🥺 and shes just using her vast wealth to threaten people into doing what she wants because shes sooooo scaaaared.
And now you're trying to claim everyone critical of her is a conservative? You dont think there are any leftists out here criticising the billionaire for being one the most directly polluting people on the planet?
No they're not.
Empathizing with the guy who programmed it: An unprovoked, targeted campaign of rape threats, death threats and harassment (and the media/legal storm that follows) against another person, all because of some little thing you coded for fun in your free time (again, giving benefit of the doubt)? And then being dragged into all of this? Yeah, I empathize like a motherfucker .
No, I think the only people who give a shit about this are right wing concern trolls.
Based on the way you've been spelling words, it would seem you're not actually from the US. Perhaps if you lived here, you would understand the real and actual danger this kind of stochastic terrorism as we're seeing it every single day. Taylor Swift is a figure who has just recently become a major target of hate and actual legitimate death/rape threats from the right because she encouraged young people to vote (no, I wish I was kidding). I don't think she even endorsed a candidate.
The GOP is so terrified of her; this is a half-assed, stochastic call to violence against a young woman who has done nothing, and this tool has gone way far beyond basic "FAA transparency," and into tool to target and potentially ruin the lives of people who do not deserve it.
(In case anyone didn't see my previous comment: not only am I not a Taylor Swift fan, I don't think I could name more than one or two songs. And if a song of hers came on the radio, I wouldn't be able to know if it was her or not)
I'm from the US, and I can tell you the biggest threat to the US are billionaires and their special interests.
Someone of the billionaire class like Taylor Swift does more environmental damage in a year than the average US citizen does through their entire lifetime. It is completely valid to call her out on this.
But please, continue to disingenuously call all those critical of Swift a right wing troll. Always easier than acknowledging the nuance of a topic.
Then you're wrong (to nobodies surprise)
We literally had Jo Cox, a sitting MP, murdered due to stochastic terrorism, but go off like you know something.
Except use private jets so much you're co2 emissions just from private jet travel for a year is over 1,000x higher than an average person's total yearly emissions.
And are you going to have the same bleeding heart response when you learn that this started out as a guy tracking Elons jet?
You are insanely pathetic. Thanks for the hilarious reads.
If she wants security in life she can just stop, change and get a 9-5 job
There's no way musk doesnt get nearly a billion death threats per day, but when your job is to be known by as many people as possible, it scales up the good and the bad.
But if either of them are having a bad day I'm sure they can dry their tears with a couple hundred dollar bills and sue some more poor people into dust (completely legally!) to make themselves feel better
I would bet my next paycheck that Taylor Swift gets at least one order of magnitude more death threats on a daily basis than Elon Musk. At least.
Let's just say there are certain demographics that tend to lash out in that manner, and they seem to overlap quite a bit with Musk fans.
And yeah dude, I get it. They're billionaires, it's hard to empathize. I agree to a point that they should shut the fuck up and just wipe their tears away with $100 bills. But in this case, when we're talking about legitimate threats against her life constantly, by people who have shown to be very capable of carrying out such threats, then I can start to see why she is doing what she's doing. Just because she's got money doesn't mean she doesn't deserve to live a life free from that kind of fear.
That's all.
Then youre losing your paycheck
Then go ahead and garnish it from George Soros
I worked in video games, and at one company there were five game designers, one of them a woman, the rest men.
I think she got a death/rape/etc threat once a week. One of the other designers had never even been messaged, and another designer was also the Community Manager. So, despite one guy being the literal face of the company, the single named woman on the design team got almost every single threat.
She left the industry, which is worse for it, but I don't think anyone thought she made the wrong choice.
Lmao simp. Taylor Swift does not care about you and will never acknowledge your existence.
How is knowing at what airport an airplane is, public information that anyone can just pull up and find without that much know how, a massive risk to safety.
And if it is, hpw is she going to stop them from dping the neglegable research themselves
It's not about it being public information. There's tons of shit that's "public information," and available to get, but there are steps that need to be taken to get it. Some more steps than others. Kind of like a soft "paywall" of sorts (minus the pay) that makes it so the internet isn't just inundated with data constantly. And sometimes, get this, you can even be denied requests for information that's "publicly available" if, for example, t's deemed that you shouldn't have it for whatever reason. But I digress...
Just because something is "publicly available information" doesn't mean it just gets broadcasted all over the internet to anyone with a Facebook account that the algorithm knows is a hateful conservative.
It's a joke that people are pretending that this is about free speech or something, and not about making it easier to constantly harass and threaten.
It's about it being targeted at one specific person, and it's about the people who are doing the targeting (which differentiates it from the Musk situation). No, not the college student who made the app, before you go there to try to undercut this argument. I'm not talking about him.
I'm talking about the people who would use a tool, that they found in their far right/conservative/republican/fascist echo chamber bubble to threaten rape and death to another human being and their loved ones.
This is kind of the crux of it, isn't it? These people are being whipped into a frenzy by whatever hate-media they consume, and without a Fox News or Tucker Carlson or whomever else to steer that frenzy toward Taylor Swift and this app, then that info would have remained "public knowledge" behind a simple search as it probably should be.
The college kid who made the app is just a tool (witting or not).
No what I mean is the FAA has a very easy registry search, and then I go to any number of FOSS aircraft trackers and I can now find the aircraft by redgistry number. that took me what 10 minutes and I was done? no need for an app. The FAA does it because its public information the plane trackers do it because plain spotting is a genuine hobby (and public information) I am someone who holds this hobby. So taking this app down does basicly nothing, it turns 2 simple steps into 1 simple step
Ontop of this, it is unreasonable to send a LEGAL team out to send a threat when no laws a broken, in some states that is an illegal act, a request from her to stop sure is reasonable (and its reasonable for him to refuse).
It doesn't matter how easy the search is to you or I... The people who have found this tool (or made it, I don't know. Don't want to accuse the student of anything untoward) are distributing it to people who would have otherwise:
never even knew such a possibility exists,
had no fucking idea how to even begin finding that information themselves regardless of how simple it may seem to you and I, and,,
not have even had the idea to use the information that way in the first place.
This is basic transparency on the part of the FAA. They disseminate this information to keep track of things, and for research purposes. It was never intended to be used in this way.
In fact, if anything significant comes out of this, it would be to limit what info the FAA makes public (and it will skew toward private jets of course). So in the long run this will probably have the opposite effect of what you want.
While yes it will likely remove public access that is more so because that is what capital has been wanting for a while, not only that but I would argue that this is part of the intended use case, to keep track of who is using our air ways and how often. Just because its not often thought of does not mean it is not right proper or intended.
The corporate bootlicking here is insane
Are you also anti union because a unionized stage crew threatens swifts profits and thus her ability to hire security?
Do you think margret thatcher has girl power?
Lol it's funny how quickly this place became reddit. There were maybe three weeks or so there where people here actually understood and cared about nuance...
Musk made the same argument.
Musk isn't receiving credible rape and death threats at nearly the level of Swift (if he is at all, let's be real) by people who are known for following through on such threats.
Look, I even empathize a little with Musk regarding that specific situation. If I were in his shoes, I also wouldn't want an app like that to exist. I don't think his situation warrants any kind of action to stop it because it's really just an inconvenience for him. And he knew that it's just an inconvenience, so how he handled himself from day to day didn't really change.
For Swift, this is legitimate fear. I don't know if you've ever experienced actual fear for your life, but it's crippling, and it effects your psyche.
To experience that on a daily basis because of an app? You bet your goddamn ass I'm going to talk to my lawyers about what my options are.
i linked your comment in the original post because yeah. this is the fact that no one gets.
the public information was available for ages and the cease and desist only happened after fox news et al sicced their rabid hoards on her.
we can still debate whether legal action was the “correct” option, but if you think it wasn’t understandable, or counts as “harassment” somehow, it’s because you have never been in the shoes of a woman who lives her whole life in fear.
And then they ask why men get disillusioned from the left.
But its not the left, its the center right.
True the OP is some lib shit
This right here. Posts like that are guilty of what they accuse themselfes: Making it about sexism.
Levying valid criticism on someone is not scapegoating. You can criticize more than one person for the same thing.
You can, but no one is
No one memed on Elon when he shut down his tracker? Or Kylie Jenner for the 3 minute flight?
Taylor has long had criticism for her jet use, the meme explosion is just about the media wanting to use her as hype prop while at the same time her team sued to shutdown the flight tracker kid. Posts that seem obsessed with possible damage to Taylor’s reputation sound like it is coming from a PR firm. Does Op genuinely believe that someone sees a Jet Meme and think differently of Taylor? Is Op against Taylor being the poster child for Aviation reform? I do not understand why an uninterested third party feels the need to prevent Taylor from suffering consequences of her actions merely because other heads should roll first.
ETA: I had to check if OP was a PR FIRM, check OP’s own response to Taylor Jet Memes: https://lemmy.cafe/comment/4651417
I agree with you but “lol maybe Taylor herself is a jet, that’s funny” is far from PR material
I viewed it as an answer to my question “Does Op genuinely believe that someone sees a Jet Meme and think differently of Taylor?”, I only saw the post because I checked if it was PR firm.
thanks for your commentary.
She isn't getting the most hate because she is the worst offender, she is getting the most hate because she is the most famous and most beloved offender right now. People already hate the likes of Musk. Not saying this is the only reason and there's no sexism etc involved, but it certainly is part of it. And I'd argue if calling attention to rich people's environment sins, it's going to get more attention the more famous and well liked the offender is. It's 'yes ALL billionaires are bad, even the one who's likeable and pretty and makes good music and never says unhinged right wing stuff'.
Totally no one memed Jeff Bezos nor Zark Muckerberg nor Tonald Drump. No one.
Yes they did? When he announced he was buying twitter/everyone/ was miming on him because they knew he was buying it to shut down that account.
The only reason this has blown up is because she threatened that tracker with legal action. It's the Streisand effect 100%. The same shit happend when Elon Musk shut down the account that was tracking him.
Gee, it's almost like she's worried about stalkers or something. And I was on the net when elon tried it ands it wasn't like this
You're treating her better than Elon purely because she's a woman. That's sexism
Never said she was better. I am saying boys are treated differently to girls
You're saying it's valid and good for her to worry about stalkers. You are not saying the same about Elon. This is purely because she is a woman and he is a man. This is sexism.
Women are not delicate flowers who need to be protected. Men are not tough monsters who do not need protecting.
Billionaires are destructive enemies of humanity - gender doesn't affect that analysis
You are correct in entirety.
Lgbtiq have the same struggles as heterosexuals
Coloured people have the same problems as whites
Third world problems are the same as first world problems
Go home mate you're cooked
?
posting this once more for reach— this is a common misconception i am seeing, where people are getting the timeline reversed.
The uptick in memes kicked off most significantly in December, and while, yes, the cease and desist was embarrassing fuel for the fire, there is no evidence that it was causal in any way.
Musk gets far worse said about him.
Nice.
Objectively and demonstrably false
Have u ever seen anyone mention any billionaire on this platform?
This isn't wrong, but the uptick in these memes coincides ridiculously with Trumps recent desire to latch on to her name.
The narrative is constantly being spun by these fucking goons.
The uptick is due to her threatening legal action against the flight tracker dude and being all over TV for football this season. I find it hard to believe the trumpers give a shit about the environment. But I suppose they could hop on the bandwagon if it fits their "enemy"
this is a common misconception i am seeing, where people are getting the timeline reversed.
The uptick in memes kicked off most significantly in December, and while, yes, the cease and desist was embarrassing fuel for the fire, there is no evidence that it was causal in any way.
Please show me an onslaught of memes even 1/10 comparable from December to this past month. I'll wait. Just because Trump is shit doesn't mean we stop criticizing others who are wrong as well, even if they are against him. Trump is a billionaire asshole, Swift is a billionaire asshole, neither gets a pass.
will you actually change your position if i provide the requested information?
because here you go. documentation of an onslaught of conspiracy memes tracing back to September 2023 but continuing into December. and, as you correctly note, it transitions to the airplane memes again in late January 2024.
edit: make no mistake, i do not defend her. just clarifying the order in which things occurred. conservative anti-Swift sentiment was strong well before the Sweeney cease and desist, which provided the strong foundation for recent trends.
Thank you for providing that first source with no mention of plane memes at all, which is the entire point of the conversation.
i mean good news if you are looking for a significant numbers plane memes in December 2023 you are chatting with the choir lol. i don’t claim that those exist in any significant number at that time so i think there was some misunderstanding and we may agree on this point.
my analysis is that a resurgence of plane memes arose out of pre-2024 conspiracy sentiment, to put it shortly. this is in parallel with Pappa_Mo’s comment. i hope we can recconnect and see eye to eye on this. because yeah i do agree that there was a 2024 uptick in memes, though i had originally worded it in a “fuel-to-the-fire” way, your wording is not wrong.
I'm not denying that conservatives haven't targeted her. I'm saying she drew fire from both sides and it's not fair to write it off as just trumpers because she deserves flak from both sides with her shitty practices.
okay excellent! i apologize for originally misunderstanding your position (other commenters have maintained that this is only, happening because of the Sweeny situation) and thanks for hearing me out. it seems we are fully in agreement.
It seems so, have a good one, my dude.
likewise 😎
They do give a shit about people who give a shit about the environment, at least.
Following the whole Taylor Swift/Travis Kelce/Superbowl nonsense where conservatives were worried it would provide a platform for Swift to be more vocal about her opposition to Trump, this whole "scandal," if one can call it that, is mighty convenient in that it drowns out any other message she would have to say.
Now if she says anything against Trump, anyone can just point to her jets and claim "Democrats are supposed to care about the environment, yet Taylor Swift can't stop flying everywhere in her two private jets. Is a hypocrite someone you should take political advice from?"
The point is that the scapegoat is usually female. Why is Taylor Swift being singled out for her private jet use? Is it because her use is assumed to be less legitimate because she's a woman?
A quick Internet search brought up this:
Source
So, attacking billionaires who are abusing private jets is totally fair, in general, but always singing out the woman who does so is misogynistic.
Where are the Rolling Stones or Laurence Stroll memes?
There have been memes about lots of shit head billionaires. The Taylor Swift ones are popular right now because she Streisand'ed it by trying to get that tracker taken down.
I mean there was a Twitter account that followed Elon's jet and was banned. That was the first time I saw a big meme around billionaires using jets. And I'm pretty sure I've seen other people criticized for it too. I feel like the focus is on Taylor this time around, but it's just one of many. Although I'm not saying there's no mysoginy involved, but I don't think she's singled out if you think of a couple years timeframe.
thank you for this! your link didn’t work for me but i think this is the one.
and note that posting a taylor meme doesn’t make you misogynist—it just means you are playing into misogynist tropes and unfortunately giving freak MAGA propaganda a disproportionate platform.
not here to call anyone out, just asking us to consider what effects our trends and memes have on the broader world.
The rolling stones are at least two people (corpses?) which makes their use (presumably to and from an elderly home) at least twice as efficient as taytay
This changes everything
I just... I can't bring myself to give a shit about Taylor Swift's airplanes when BP and Shell still exist and capitalism is still the dominant economic system.
I can give a shit about both and more.
Imagine if we could only give a shit about one threat to our existence at a time. We’d be ignoring a billion others.
I mean, kudos to you for having the energy to get so far down the list of things that actually matter about climate change that you reach the one person and a few private jets section of the list, but I'd rather use that brain space to play a board game or something.
Yet you have the energy to complain about me doing it.
All energy use is equal! Also, nuance does not exist, and actually, it never did!
Imagine replying to a comment that is clearly about relative impacts, and twisting it so that it sounds like the person you are replying to has some sort of fundamental deficiency in how they perceive the world.
How wonderfully ironic!
Taylor Swift isn't a threat to our existence, her plane emits 8000 tons of CO2 a year, roughly equivalent to the emissions of two thousand cows. At least she pays for carbon offsets.
BP and Shell only have that much power exacly because people buy fossil fuels from them. If demand would drop, their profits and political power would drop accordingly. As long as we don't even hold the biggest financiers of these companies responsible, how can anything change? Demand drives supply.
It's like saying "As long as hitmans exist, I won't give a shit about the people who pay hitmans, all consumption under capitalism is unethical anyways so anything goes." As long as we ignore those who actually fund the problem, we won't be able to fix anything.
No they have so much power because decades of lobbying have made it impossible to get anywhere without traveling on a road in a car— Which uses gas. This is not a problem citizens can feasibly solve, this sort if problem can only be fixed with government intervention.
Maybe this time we can solve our problems by simply just hating a powerful, successful woman though.
*By simply hating a billionaire.
Some of the criticism levied against Taylor Swift is definitely rooted in sexism, misogyny, and political bias: but not all of it.
To lump everyone criticizing Taylor Swift into the same group as the misogynists and sexists is disingenuous. She deserves criticism and is not free of it just because she's a woman.
She's also one of the most famous people in the world. So of course she's going to get more flack from her visibility alone.
Thus the following can be true: Taylor Swift isn't the only one that deserves criticism from her private jet usage. And there are those that would criticize her in bad faith because of her political alignments/because she's a woman. But even then the criticism she has received is still completely valid.
No billionaire deserves or needs special treatment.
I mean yeah definitely fair, i don’t disagree billionaires shouldn’t exist.
I appreciate the reply. I feel like a lot of people in this thread are failing to articulate themselves properly. Though there are clearly some commenters that have (very) misogynistic views that need to be checked.
My comment has nothing to do with Taylor Swift. In fact, I’m a fan of hers. I’m entirely talking about the companies, BP and Shell.
Call me weird but when I condemn an action, I do it equally without regard for what’s between the person’s legs.
I agree that many urban areas need a lot more and better public transport, which is a systemic solution.
In rural regions it's not practical to build enough infrastructure to replace private transport though. Electric cars are a good solution there and will also get more affordable in the next years (over the lifetime they are already roughly as cheap as gas cars).
based
I mean it's hilarious that we pilloried Elon Musk for trying to sue someone for tracking his private jet with publicly available records and posting this online, but the same people are defending Taylor Swift for doing the same.
I don't think it's a gender bias so much as it's a bias towards people we don't like.
It's like saying people did it with Elon Musk because he is African.
Do you have a list of people that you're cross-checking to make sure they're the same? Because you know how the internet works right? Those were likely not the same people.
In my opinion, they both have the right to challenge this, so there's nothing wrong with her doing that. Second, conservatives are currently foaming at the mouth to do harm to this woman, so I really cannot blame her for feeling unsafe. Musk is just a crybaby.
Thinking rich people have the right to threaten people for knowing and stating public information is such a bonkers take. Thats like calling organ donors unethical.
Wtf does this have to do with her gender? Are you claiming she does not top the charts in celebrity carbon emissions, but is being used as the scapegoat instead of a man?
The Conservatives aren't attacking her because of her gender, it's because of
theirher influence. Misogyny has nothing to do with it, they'd do the exact same with any celebrity of any identity/orientation because they're influence conflicts with their agenda, not because of their gender.This smells a lot like ground-laying for radical feminist arguments, I can't find any other reason you would be here making a mountain out of an imaginary anthill. Moreover, I can't understand why anyone upvoting this would care to see a non-humorous PSA in a "hello fellow teens" vaporware frame on a surrealist/(whatever it's called) shitposting community unless it is meant to be satire.
edit: gendered a pronoun to make it concise who the subject was
Exactly, this smells of TERF rhetoric.
It's a valid criticism, I'm just wondering where 90% of those folks criticizing were the last 10 years, when it would have also been a valid criticism against her, but only a select group of people called it out and I recall precisely zero memes on this specific topic. Curious, that this has only become a mainstream meme now that there is a defamation campaign actively being conducted against her by right wing media.
Because most people don’t give a shit about her until she’s in the news and she was recently all over the news?
I remember people making jokes about it last year on reddit too, so they only come up when she becomes relevant to most of us.
I find the whole “you’re just criticising a billionaire because she’s a woman” angle or “it’s because right wing smear campaign” to be much more sus. Obvs some PR firm working overtime to frame negative remarks about her as something more sinister.
Her, musk, and any other billionaire deserves to be eaten. No remorse for these shitscum.
Funny how fame works
All billionaires are evil. That includes all female billionaires
I think it more coincides with the legal threats against a person who was keeping track of her flights
This is the issue, not criticising Swift in general.
OP misses the mark in my eyes, not because the misogyny isn't fuelling the recent wave of criticism from the right (who couldn't give two fucks about emissions since they don't believe in climate change), but because it lumps all criticism of Swift together, valid or not, almost feeling like it's pro-Swift rather than being anti-misogyny, and fuck being pro Swift, and excusing any of her actions (downsizing from two jets to one isn't worthy of any praise nor defence, it's not like she can use both at once, and is still flying just as much).
You can (and should) call out misogynists without defending the billionaire.
thank you for your nuanced response :)
i absolutely hear your qualms with my post and i wish i was a good enough rhetoricist to quell them, but i’ll just say i 100% am not in this to defend Swift. when the memes kicked off over a year ago in mid 2022 i found them really funny and rhetorically useful. she deserved the eyes on her that she got because it was proportionate to the damage she is causing.
but now it’s 2024 and she has reduced flights by over half (depending on how you count), and it’s only now that the meme has really become fashionable? this is where i see the issue, that the collective ridicule for her is now disproportionate to the damage she is involved in.
does she deserve the memes still? yeah totally. is she the very best option to meme among the dozens of celebrities and capital owners who do almost identically awful things? i personally don’t think so, not quite. is it concerning that MAGA folks have latched on to her now as evil for encouraging votes, citing CO2 emissions as though they had ever given a flying fuck about them? absolutely.
summary: i have zero defense for Swift or her actions. it is impossible to become a billionaire without exploitation. but the window of peak rhetorical opportunity for these memes has passed by over a year and it’s very unlikely that beating this dead horse is going to make any further positive change in her behaviors. i’m here to encourage you to just see that, and make your own decisions from there.
I appreciate you hearing me out and yeah, I've seen you around (in a non stalkery way lol) and you don't strike me as someone who would support her, but this one meme kinda does? But then, I'm looking at it from the very far left, it would absolutely hit home with a more liberal crowd, which is probably more the target audience, so it might be just right for that. 🤷♀️
I guess it just feels icky to me to have to use she only uses one jet 3 times a day now as a positive thing, plus I have a very low tolerance for lib-coddling lol.. 😂(E: nothing against those who can take it for the sake of educating them, I just can't do it anymore, I'm blunt, and it's up to them to take it or leave it)
Yeah it's almost like she did something recently that got her in the news about this.
Something like sending a cease and desist letter to the kid that tracks her jet threatening bullshit legal action.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-08/taylor-swift-issues-cease-and-desist-to-student-tracking-jet/103440402
I always criticized her and every other ultra wealthy PoS. Celebrity culture needs to die off as it is anyway
Yeah, criticizing the Rolling Stones in 2024 is totally equivalent to criticizing Taylor Swift, yeah let's pivot right to that. Ignore the fact that she's arguably the most popular musician on earth right now, just played a major cultural event, and all recent events.... no, let's go back to a washed up classic rock band and meme on them instead. Yeah, that'll work.
Fucking Swifties dude.....
honestly, for me personally? the fact a “washed up classic rock band,” as you put it, is outputting more CO2 than an actually-relevant Swift? that’s a huge difference and reason to be all the more critical of The Rolling Stones. like what are they even doing all that for lol.
i criticize both and defend neither.
Yeah it sucks they seem to get a free pass, there certainly is an element of truth in this post. However, I still think the post is fighting the wrong battle. Memes will pass and Swift has certainly caused this shitstorm herself by threatening to sue a regular joe over public accessible information.
It's a general accepted truth rich people and companies have been spewing the majority of CO2 emissions, and this post is just a whole load of "whataboutisms".
I genuinely can't believe I'm the first one to actively press the downvote button on this post, what a load of bullshit.
this instance has downvotes disabled which is why you are seeing as though you are the first to downvote.
i hear and understand your position, and fear not you are not alone in your opinion :)
Oh that didn't occur to me, I retract the last part of my comment!
I only know Taylor Swift from Americans talking about her. Presumably she's "the biggest in the world" just like the Superbowl is the biggest TV or sports event in the world, which it isn't.
I'm just speaking to how she recently set a world record
They may be decrepit, but they're still massively popular. Just not so much among young people.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67283429
Is this because she's a woman or because she's a billionaire? I feel like we make fun of plenty of men too
It's because she's threatening to sue the guy that tracks the jet.
I'm quite confident that, more often than not, women face greater challenges than men.
This post is fucking weird.
Yeah, I'm not doubting the validity of the statement that women definitely have hardships men don't, but I really feel like that's not why she's being memed.
She is getting this attention because some very powerful people, who benefit from producing a lot of greenhouse gases, would prefer that everyone be mad at T Swift instead of them.
Tin foil hat take
Looks like the oil company representative found me :)
Its adorable you think swift sent lawyer threats at the request of an oil company
I never said that. You should practice reading more. Don't worry tones of people have overcome illiteracy. I believe you can too.
What did they do about overcoming irony?
Shes getting this attention for the same reason musk got it. She sent legal threats to someone legally pointing out public data about wasteful private flights.
Theres no secret cabal of oil magnates puppeteering internet memes. She is being mocked for trying to threaten someone over public info of her wastefulness.
Yeah, I agree, I think some of this is due to the streisand effect. And I think T Swift is dumb for trying to sue that reporter. But Elon got way less shit than this when he tried to silence the reporter tracking his flights.
As for the secret cabal of oil magnates, your right, they don't exist. There is a public cabal of oil magnates. They have done several astroturfing campaigns in the past that are now well documented.
...... Elon got so much shit for this he directly contacted the former twitter CEO to try and get the guy banned, and has privately said it was one of the driving factors behind his initial bluff at buying twitter, so your conspiracy theory is yet again slapped down by reality
A quick Google shows that Elon finalized the Twitter purchase in October of 2022 and the Elon jet Twitter thing started in December.
Was there another jet tracking incidents with Elon? Otherwise, it seems like you're confused about the order of things.
Edit: Turns out I had a Google fail. The December date was a second account at the journalist created. My information is not correct here.
Uh my guy
"Musk had also unsuccessfully petitioned Agrawal [CEO of Twitter at the time] to remove a Twitter account that was tracking his private plane,"
"The billionaire started buying Twitter shares shortly after Agrawal denied his request."
This took me 10 seconds to find.
Ah, I messed up. I should have dug deeper instead of reading the google summary. This is what I found on Wiki:
On December 22, 2022, Sweeney started the new @ElonJetNextDay Twitter account
But...
"the handle @elonjet.[10]
The Twitter account, created in June 2020, "
Sorry about that, I trusted too much in googles summary.
Was there a lot of meming about this on twitter when it was happening, or did Elon see like one or two memes and decide to buy twitter?
I assume the jet thing is just an excuse because Taylor Swift is the target du jour of the MAGA movement. They don't care about the jet use of anyone else but are actively making up shit about Swift.
This isn't about principles. It's just about othering.
This is about Swift trying to take down the guy aggregating PUBLIC flight data because it inconveniences her.
I'm really of two minds on the private jet thing, because she undeniably was doing it way too much and for way too short distances, but for longer distances, I can see someone of her level of fame needing to fly privately for security reasons. I doubt Taylor Swift walking through an airport and getting on a Delta flight would be especially safe for her.
I do not like the idea of celebrities traveling in private jets overall, but when you're at Beatles-level fame? The Beatles chartered private flights too. Maybe she should charter, but I can see why flying commercial is a bad plan.
Let the mass downvoting commence.
Maybe we all need to stop subsidizing the airline industry so that these rich assholes who want to fly around all the time for their convenience can pay the entire price themselves. Airlines and airports are publicly funded and utterly unsustainable without massive infusions of government cash and protection at every step along the way.
The fact that we pretend these airline companies and airports are in any way actual businesses Is just a way for the wealthy who get to fly all the time (private jets or not) to offload the cost of their convenient transportation onto the American people.
I'm fine with government-run airlines, but I don't think that would change the security issue I'm talking about.
I think the security issue is a non-issue, and there's no way to "solve" it without creating greater problems and degrading other people's rights.
The truth is, she doesn't give a flying fuck about the consequences of her wealth getting. In some ways she is opposed to the right wing noise machine, but she is still acting as though she's entitled to special treatment from the government including extra rights just because she's rich.
She only decreased the number of private jet flights she was taking, and decrease the number of private jets she owned because of the public pressure. Her security is not more important than the environment.
She volunteered to take the heat off of Elon. I don't know why she would do that, but she definitely volunteered for a lot of negative attention when she decided to target a private citizen doing something they are legally entitled to do and use her money to intimidate them out of exercising their rights.
That's who she is deep down inside, entitled.
A non-issue? You think she doesn't get mobbed wherever she goes? I'd call that a huge issue. Unless you think it's okay for fans to paw at her, tear at her clothes, etc. That is what they do.
Exactly, she's a victim. A victim of the life she chose and worked really hard to achieve. I bet she cries herself to sleep every night on her Scrooge McDuck style piles of cash.
No, she's not a victim, she's a security risk. Are you not reading what I'm writing? Do you think she would be the only one hurt if there were a riot?
I think Paul McCartney is/was a much bigger star than taytay and has been taking busses his entire career
I'm pretty sure he can't take a bus from London to New York. And I would be very surprised if he flies commercial when he crosses the ocean.
Obviously if she can get there without being so wasteful, she should. That was not my point. In fact, I specifically referenced The Beatles flying on a private plane when they first came to America. That would include Paul McCartney.
Idk how any of that is relevant. If Paul, at the height of his fame, could ride a bus without being mobbed then Taylor Swift can fly commercial with an entire airport's worth of security watching her back
Are you under the impression that he was going to gigs on a Greyhound?
It was a private bus.
He takes public city busses in NYC, London, and probably other places. Of course he's not taking a city bus on tour with him it's weird you would even imply that's what I meant
https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/paul-mccartney-enjoys-taking-bus-find-grounding.html/
Are you typing from the mad max universe?
I think her getting mobbed is not my problem.
She's rich enough that she can afford private security. She's a private citizen who can decide where she goes and where she does not go.
Nothing about anything you've described justifies stripping other people of their rights.
If she's being assaulted in public, that's an actual crime, and she should invoke the legal system then.
The legal system does not entitle her to silence people sharing publicly available information. The person who shared the movement of her private jet is not to blame for her lack of security when she gets where she's going. No one's mobbing her on the tarmac, no one's crowding into the airport past security without a ticket.
She is not special. She's just an American, she's entitled to absolutely nothing extra. Her attempt to use the law as a weapon of intimidation simply because she has money to push it around is exactly why she deserves negative attention right now.
I didn't say anything about her trying to silence people. This is purely about keeping her and others safe. Her presence in a public airport could literally cause a riot. You must know that.
If that were true, there'd be a riot every time a very famous person goes outside for any reason.
I'm sure she'd be approached and photographed and her privacy violated as much as people can get to her in a private lounge, but unless they were to advertise she is going to a certain airport at a specific time, it's incredibly unlikely she'd be mobbed. Ironically, flying publicly would make her movements harder to follow.
She can certainly afford to pay for 10 extra first class tickets for her staff, it'd most likely be much cheaper than owning her own jet. I'm sure the airports would also be thrilled to offer a private entrance and area for her/other famous people to be able to avoid even walking to her VIP lounge. Maybe they could help subsidize the airports instead of average people's taxes paying for their private airports in part.
I think you know there's a big difference between going outside and being in a crowded airport.
And, again, she doesn't have to own the jet. She could charter one. Anyone can charter a short flight for a couple of thousand dollars.
Yes, an airport limits the amount of people, has a very high coverage of surveillance and a high ratio of security staff as well as an entry barrier and dedicated VIP areas. A generic place outside has none of that. Although feel free to elaborate on how an airport is worse for security than just being on a street, anywhere.
To your second point, sure she doesn't need to own them like nobody else does, but the issue (for me) is not primarily that she (or anyone) owns one, but that they [private jets and private airports] exist, and they're subsidized by us as it was pointed out above. If anything, they should be priced outrageously so using them would come down last resort or emergency situations, and the money from that could help balance the cost of the "public" infrastructure. This is a failure of the government, but equally so of the rich who choose to continue using them for their luxury.
I still don't see what the difference between a chartered flight and a limousine is other than one is in the air and the other is on the road.
As mentioned above, airport and airlines are heavily subsidized, this includes private airports and jets. For a limo, taxes pay for the road - but everyone can drive on it, so it'd exist with or without them. Maybe a better comparison would be if she had a bus that she travelled in alone, compared to the average person that'd be equally ridiculous.
The emissions of a limo is pretty much in line with the emissions of a family car. Most people wouldn't have a small car and a family car for when they're alone, so even if someone is alone on a limo, they're probably not doing much more harm than the average person.
A private jet's emissions are significantly more per passenger than a commercial plane. Even if a private jet always flies at max capacity - which I'd bet rarely happens - it'll cause significantly more emissions per person than a commercial plane (it's difficult to link a source here as I've not found an exact number. The estimates I've found range between 10 to 43x. Even assuming just 10x that's quite a difference)
You mean, besides the massive reason people are criticizing her for private flights in the first place? If we just forget about the multiple magnitudes of difference between fuel usage of a car vs a plane?
Yeah I'm not really sure what your point is in all of this. It's entirely reasonable to resent publicly funding this private luxury.
Maybe we publicly should not be subsidizing the private jet industry, private jet infrastructure, and teeny tiny little airports for ultra wealthy people.
If she wants to fly private then she has to accept what goes along with that. It is a very inefficient, environmentally harmful, selfish way to travel. Private jet flights are another great example of wealthy people leaching off the public.
When did I say it should be publicly funded? Please quote me.
It currently is. It's currently publicly funded. That's how private jet flights work.
That's the entire context of all of my comments. It's why the majority of the words in my comments here have been on the specific subject of the public expense attached to private jet ownership and infrastructure.
Her private jet costs taxpayers, most of whom can't pay their own bills without government assistance, tremendous amounts of money.
It is reasonable for people to resent her, a billionaire, for allowing the public to pick up the tab for her outlandishly luxuriant lifestyle.
Just like when people did this to Elon Musk, tracking private jet flights is a piece of accountability. There's nothing wrong with tracking their flights, and there is definitely something wrong with them trying to use the their money to force the legal system to silence people who are tracking their flights.
Yes, and I don't disagree with what you have been saying.
It's just that my point had nothing to do with any of it.
I think I made it pretty clear that if she's willing to pay the actual cost of her transportation then we would all have fewer reasons to resent her behavior.
Flying private jets is exclusively the purview of people wealthy enough to value their time more than yours. There's no moral or ethical way to use that infrastructure as long as it's being publicly funded by people who can't afford to go to the fucking doctor.
The right thing for her to do is opt out.
Because she is so wealthy, because she is so famous, because she is so influential, she has a greater obligation to actually find some fucking convictions and stick by them.
If her traveling around makes people unsafe then maybe she should stay put. That's what any other regular person would have to do. It wouldn't be fair, but it would be what they had to do because the system is not going to bend over backwards to accommodate them.
Taylor Swift is not special.
It literally wouldnt, this handwringing is unneeded for someone who does not care about you and is not doing this for security reasons
What part of 'riot' are you missing here? I care about all the other people who could be injured as much as I do here. Why don't you?
What part of "airport" are you missing? People cannot flood into an airport. People in an airport cannot afford to abandon their gates to go mob some random celeb.
This is a made up problem that doesnt happen to any of the equally famous people who fly first class with zero issues.
Youre hand wringing for someone who wouldnt even give you the time of day
Got it. This never happened.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/taylor-swift-mobbed-by-fans-delays-flights-at-japan-airport/articleshow/47147634.cms?from=mdr
Because of her private flight, you mean?
Oh wait, weird, its almost like taking private flights marks your travel and makes it easier for a mob to follow you, a thing that cannot happen on public flights where you dont publicly own the plane
Kinda weird how a mob cannot spawn out of nowhere when no one in the airport knows ahead of time that youre coming, huh
wait, airline subsidies also go toward private jets? TIL if true.
i would love a source for further reading if you have one :)
Airports and the entire airline infrastructure is dependent upon government subsidy and protection. You're paying for other people to fly whether or not you ever fly, and private jets benefit more from this per seat and per flight than anyone else while paying the least to support it.
there's a high public cost to private jets
holy shit thank you 🫨
Remember when Taylor Swift urged her audience to go out and vote? I can't escape the feeling that riffing constantly on her carbon footprint is a retaliation for that. They finally found something about her to latch on to.
Yeah no shit. They're terrified of her, and her influence over young people.
The GOP knows that their only viable strategy is to get fewer people to vote, and the easiest way to do that is to disenfranchise young voters. So they see Taylor as a direct threat to their only means of validly winning an election.
I just don't understand this. In any reasonable conversation, these two things have nothing to do with each other.
Who is reading Swift memes and thinking "Man, I was going to vote, but seeing how much she jets around has really made me not want to anymore."
You all Swifties are as conspiratorial as the QAnon folks.
It's funny because she is not a plane or made of planes, or brushes her teeth with airliners, but the funny pictures say that she is lol
the memes are funny! you’ll never catch me discounting that. i just think it’s good to question who is benefiting from the disproportionate coverage in 2024, and if a stronger case could be made to direct our meming at others. :)
Billionaires Aren't People
The best way to make it easy to commit crimes against other humans is to turn them into non people.
I however see no problem in this instance. Carry on.
Corporations aren't people, billionaires literally are; that's the problem, no single human should have such an out sized share.
I'm going to point out something else that, unfortunately, will feel like an attack to some, though I hope my viewpoint is sound:
Taylor Swift is a product of an industry supported by us. Maybe not you, the reader, specifically, though by a couple billion around the world, across often only dozens of artists. That is entertainment. That is the industry. A byproduct and need of this career is travel and you certainly aren't taking a sailboat across the Atlantic to meet deadlines. Now, I am not blaming us. As always it is the industry and those expectations that should be blamed. We are a tiny part of a larger, global issue, though discriminated against and blamed due to our lack of individual authority. Gaslighting is a hell of a drug.
So while I can question Swift's initial amount of private flights, I will also point out that her hopping in a plane is likely akin to us driving a car, in the essence of usage of resources. We all use in excess to some degree and she did dial it back. That alone is important. Finally, I want to call out the bandwagoners and the envious.
I haven't knowingly listened to a single Taylor Swift song. Not sure I could name one tbh. Though for all the energy those of you who are envious put into criticism of what I can tell is one of the lesser evils amongst the many billionaires ruining this planet, you could be doing more and better. I'll admit, many of the memes were rather funny and dunking on someone with the wealth to afford a team of private therapists can be enjoyable, it has bothered me that we leaned so hard on seemingly (so far) the one wealth enjoyer with a bit of empathy.
Anyway, on the toilet at work. So if you need a reason for this there you go. lol I recognize that I probably don't have all the info. Plenty of people will likely come out with some nitpicked story or article or claim. On the scope of actual problems though? Taylor isn't one of them, I feel. At least not yet. Hopefully not ever.
Seems to me it is when we are on the toilet that we are at our most reasonable.
I also know next to nothing about Taylor Swift, but if her "Swifties" want it, I wouldn't be surprised if she's one of the first jet-setting celebs with a hydrogen or electric aircraft.
I think it would be smart PR, as well as 'the right thing to do,' for her to invest in some companies to help herself (and the rest of us) get to that point.
That you for putting this so well. Now we're entering the next phase, progressives arguing and attacking each other while climate inaction continues uninterrupted :D
That you?
You have my deepeds thats for pointing thank out
You're giving me a headache
Well, there is Dexter Holland (Lead singer of The Offspring) that flys his own private jet. So you can yell at him now
Flying your own jet isn't better or worse than having someone else fly it.
But if his private jet is a normal private jet and not a small Cessna then yes he should stop flying it.
I agree with the general idea here, but when I started following the Swift jet tracker after the Superbowl, I saw her make two flights that next day. Seems to me, some people are taking a whole hell of a lot while the rest of us are left with scraps.
I’m not sure I fully understand the criticism to be perfectly honest. Is it actually possible to have a mega pop star of that type without them having a more intensive carbon footprint? Like she can’t really fly commercially for a lot of reasons. Tour schedules are one thing but can you imagine the scene it would make?
Fame is really just letting one person, who we consider special for some reason, use the resources of many. They get to live an extravagant lifestyle and we get the cultural benefit their work.
Bottom line: private jet travel seems to me like a requirement of her job. I’m not about to sit here and shame everyone for the carbon output that their job requires of them. She is not some capital class, passive income, leech. The lady works.
FWIW, I don’t really think I could name or identify one of her songs. Everything I know about her is what bleeds through into my media sphere. She could be a real shitheal for all I know.
The issue isn’t that she has a private jet or uses it, it’s that it’s used for 13 minute flights.
https://www.newsweek.com/taylor-swift-private-jet-jack-sweeney-flights-1868272
And also, that someone built software to show publicly available data on how inefficient the use of her jet is, and then her team threatened legal action against them
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-swift-jet-tracking-legal-threat/
Her jet was 28 miles from it’s destination, the president of the United States still travels that destination by vehicle (granted it’s a motorcade) but still far more environmentally friendly than burning fossil fuels in a jet to hop over to the next airport
Meh, sometimes I drive places a really should have walked. Same shit different scale. I am not moved to anger by this. Eliminate fame or accept that it’s resource intensive.
Yeah that's kind of the entire point.
sounds like you are part of the problem
really that depends on a number of factors. like how big the jet is, etc.
some of those planes are pretty small.
my friend and i worked with a guy for many years, that was also a pilot. he was a pretty frugal dude, but was fairly smart with his money. flying his small plane was a bit of a hobby for him. he owned a store location in the city we were in, but also had another store location about a hour/hour-and-half drive. sometimes he would take his plane, as it was actually cheaper and faster to go to the airport, get his plane prepped, fly out, do whatever he had to do, and fly back.
undoubtedly he was using this as an excuse to fly his plane a bit. but i definitely know he wouldn't have been doing it if it was costing him any significant amount of money. he wasn't loaded, and was always about saving some money.
ok but I don't think many billionaires are out there flying Cessnas to save a bit of money.
There's no way that was a jet. A jet is in an entirely different class than a little prop plane... It's like comparing a motorcycle to a tank
Few centuries ago special people (who have power) have slaves but things have changed. Maybe they shouldn't do concerts every week all over the world, they shouldn't fly over the country to assist to the opening of some store,....etc.
You know things change and we should adapt.
Bleh, she's a brand, not a person, she doesn't work she's just a part owner of the brand, and celebrities need to be abolished anyway.
Is this Reddit?
Gtfo I can’t downvote this shit enough.
Ah yes, a text post with informative links... This must be Reddit!
What could possibly even be your problem with this post?
Insane to defend a multimillionaire just because shes a woman. Especially when she isnt even the first person the internet criticized for airplane waste.
Youre the person being mocked by eric andres "girl power" bit
I don't see any defending especially just because she's a woman, I see a post trying to point out that there's bigger better targets than the current popular one.
Choosing the most popular person there is right now seems counterintuitive to me either way.
Shes a target because she sent legal threats to a person posting public flight details about private flights.
For the same reason musk was a target, after he did the exact same thing for the exact same reason.
I mean that's stupid, but I don't feel like that'd be the only reason nor does it actually matter in the full context of this post.
This Post is trying to hide the fact that she sent out legal threats to shut down a completely legal account and instead tries to make it all about her being a woman.
That's my Problem with the Post.
Musk tried it and got shit for it. Why should she be any different?
hi, OP here, not trying to hide this fact at all. in fact i think it’s a very important part of the story to know. :)
here it is: Taylor Swift sends cease-and-desist letter to student tracking her private jets, says she's in 'constant state of fear'
Seems to be covered in the edit... Yet your comment isn't....
It's not a text post. It's an image post that should be a text post.
It's a cute graphic for a post like this, who cares about nitpicking things like this. It's also in 196 which revolves around images.
thanks i thought it was cute too :3
I like this format for public address
Your points have been heard and my opinion has been swayed
yo thanks :) take care 🫶
why am i supposed to care about this person? why do people keep talking about her? i don't care!!!!!!!
She has caused Republican thinktanks to panic by not supporting their candidate for president. She is the new Hillary Clinton, and if that name doesn't ring a bell, I am not trained to help you.
yeah, they only meme about her because she is a threat to the maga crowd
Spujb is good people. I appreciate all the content you post.
So in all honesty, I have been adamantly anti Taylor Swift since the moment I learned there was a new pop star, but this is only because I hate all pop stars and anything corporate. I appreciate the reminder to check yourself on misogyny though. That really does slip into our subconscious so easily.
You know what hate brigade I am praying for? Dave fucking Grohl. I cannot think of a more neutral ass corporate shill.
holy shit homie this means a lot thank you 🫶
We already did Elon Musk, now we're on Taylor Swift, the next one? Who knows
why is everyone fixated on private jets lmao, it's prolly not a significant part of billionaires' footprint
Pretty sure it's a campaign message. Throw lots of 'oh look Taylor is destroying the environment with her jet' noise around the interwebs to try and discredit her voice against Trump. It's a PR campaign designed by toddlers.
Put a carbon tax on jet fuel and use the proceeds to build better carbon neutral public infrastructure and she can fly as much as she wants for all I care
Unfortunately the target audience is also toddlers, so it is very effective.
The venn diagram of people concerned enough about the climate to dislike Taylor Swift and people who would ever vote Trump are two distant, distant circles
It's not about Republicans caring about the climate, it's about delegitimizing Swift's statements against them. They can paint her as a hypocrite and drown out anything she has to say, basically.
And yet, Trump voters just love the owner of an electric car company.
They care more about attacking than consistency.
(They don't love him because he makes electric cars)
every day i wake up and am sad that we live in a world where PR designed by toddlers works :(
No, it's a lot of their footprint. And it's entirely temporary - a mansion should last generations, but a flight on a jet is instant carbon with zero long term value
It's actually by far the biggest part of her footprint.
Most people don't realise just how bad private jets are.
Is it really that bad with the Memes? It's not like people will see a Plane Meme and go "Time to vote for fascists!".
There are so many of them now because they are new and easy to make, I guess. Sure it's never nice If someone you like I getting memed about for a bad thing he/she did. But just wait some Time and they will turn down and then stop.
You really should read up on how people are recruited to the alt right. It literally starts with comments like you just made. It's not a quick jump to "yay fascism" but you have already taken the first step.
Lol, they didn’t take the first step
They helped someone else take it
You know what? I wrote an Comment why your Argument is BS. That I'm actively working to get Germanys far-right Party banned, that I'm a Party-Member and organise anti Fascists Rally's.
But I don't need to prove to a random Internet Person like you anything. I can just say:"You are wrong and you have no Clue about what you are talking." And then I just block you! Tadaaa! Much less trouble. :P
in my view, it’s about directing the attack in the right direction. as we speak, there are dozens of oil and airline lobbyists, conservative scum, who are fully taking the benefit of Swift being the one in the limelight instead of them.
i don’t like giving those capital owners any more freebies than they already get just for existing.
Okay that's true, tho. Someone should come up with an Meme format about these pricks. It needs to be easy to make and versatile to use 🤔
The Taylor airplane meme has basically been played out and is no longer funny.
But for me the reason I found those memes funny is the same why I find it more interesting to take the piss out of Bill Gates rather than Musk. Everyone already knows Musk is a complete nut job. But there seem to be an alarming amount of people that think Gates is genuinely a good person because of his stupid charity.
From what I see Taylor Swift is just a business woman doing business, and she is very good at that. So most decisions she makes are because she assesses that they are good for her brand, and this includes political decisions/ standpoints. The airplane angle is one of the few things she can not control in this regard, and that is why I find/found it funny to stress that point.
The concept of the airplane meme might be loosing steam, but I enjoy the creative works and get thrilled when I see a new level added on. The airplane for bed, airplane for an airplane, it's the same category of humor in which I can find an Onion article entertaining even if I read a serious news article about the same subject.
Thank you for saying this. I have nothing else to say but an upvote seemed insufficient!
thanks bestie 🫶
Let’s not forget that at least 50 of Lawrence’s flights are F1 races scattered around the globe in a horrible order for environmental concerns and are increasingly hosted in oil barren countries because F1 loves blood/oil money more than anything
Yeah I kinda agree, she's not the only one in the wrong (Elon does far worse), private jets should be banned.
Make memes about premier league (or any other sportsperson) footballers and see them cut back on their jet planes usage... NOT!
i endorse this message.
Well ... this meme format ... such was the style at the time, but we didn't post pics on the internet back then. Why use millions of times more data bandwidth than is necessary (pic vs ascii)?
this is such a great question, and one I am interested in myself.
you have to consider engagement and reach. let’s look at the numbers:
so your estimate of “millions of times” is already not quite accurate. its just a little more than 1000x.
from experience on the internet, i know that people are more likely to read something if it looks pretty. advertisers and marketers are aware of this too.
so am i getting 1000x more reach than if i just did a text post? well, without empirical evidence, my guess is actually probably, or at least in that ballpark. especially considering the context that this is c/196 and no one really wants to read text posts on here :)
Oh, thx for the numbers.
And I do apologize for the poetic 'million', it was, as everything else in that reply, a joke (I'm saying that I was in fact not wondering why we post pics, nor think we should text format all the things - I mean, we have video blogs, that's just ascii with unnecessary human bits :D (again, joking)). I mean, I look at memes hours per day & shitpost them around, I understand sharing images.
The main point/reference/nostalgia I was trying to make was putting together classic windows theme (starting in dial-up era) and how impractical would have been to use images back then.
(Also, not that it matters in the million, I was thinking uncompressed png vs ascii.)
No I'm pretty sure most of us just make the memes about her because her music sucks ass, not because she's a woman.
But it's fun tho
Based take
Feminism goes brrrr, as it should ✨🚀
Natalie Wynn is cringe AF her outfits are just the petit bourgeoisie version of the TayTay private jet and her theatrics are annoying and do more damage to the credibility of progressives than the soviet union ever could.
bro is comparing some clothes to the imprisonment and execution of millions of people 💀
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Natalie Wynn
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
let's make fun of dead dictators instead
So what even happened?