Hard to Stan Billie Eilish

[Buddy 5,686]

58 minutes ago, PeachJug said:

ALSO: I in no way mean to denounce Billie. She didn't ask to be looked up to for her personal  choices. She's here to share her music.

But I know we've all been in this position before, and since we have so much freedom of choice, SHOULD we make these hard decisions? Think Kanye... Some say his music is genius, but many of us here can't even give it a chance bc of him. (Idk if that's the best example but you know what I mean)

 

I'm a mess 

Why are you acting like Billie is oozing problematic? She ain't Azealia Banks. She likes ONE hip hop artist who is problematic. That's nothing, jeez.

[Werk 13,165]

7 hours ago, PeachJug said:

Even things like Chic fil A... I avoid completely, because, well, as a consumer I have so many choices. I might as well choose one that fits with the direction I hope the world goes. 

 But it haunts me when I send money to places I shouldn't. 

I don't even eat there but I do constantly get turned off due to their homophobia.

5 hours ago, lovedillon said:

I do this all the time. If I don’t agree with an artist or their beliefs then I don’t support them which means I don’t stream their music or watch their videos because by doing so they make money & you end up supporting them & their beliefs as a person. So I think it’s great that you’re thinking about this stuff. Choose whatever feels right for you.

Yeah this is really where "overthinking" it would fit. You basically don't want to give money to the wrong entity like you said. Also @PeachJug, David Bowie is starting to be be seen as problematic by many due to his sexual life which I recommend you find if you don't already know

[Sumeet 456]

You can't decide if you can Stan someone or not. It just happens you know. 

[LordEnigma 11,313]

7 hours ago, PeachJug said:

I guess before the conversation continues I'd like to say that I think you guys are bringing up really great points. I definitely do overthink these things.

Even things like Chic fil A... I avoid completely, because, well, as a consumer I have so many choices. I might as well choose one that fits with the direction I hope the world goes. Maybe overthinking these morality things is something I'll get over, but at 20 right now I cant help but think now is the time to.

And one more thing: you guys are bringing up a great point that I can still appreciate the music. And to some extent I do. But it haunts me when I send money to places I shouldn't. Like, should I go to her concerts... I don't know. She's not a bad person, so maybe. Everyone has blunders in judgement, but... ugh

At 20, you think you can change the world with your actions but unfortunately - you'll see that you are just a tiny spec in an almost 7 billion population. It's good that you want to choose the best option but you'll also see that everyone has ups and downs and light/dark sides. 

I wouldn't over think it nor think you will end someone's career/business by not using their product/buying their music/etc.

[misunderstood 8,736]

 

Understandable reasons why you're conflicted, but personally I feel like people's pasts aren't all that they are. Especially someone like X who before he died was willingly and actively trying to become a better person. Which people act like isn't important when anyone who's done wrong wanting to change shows growth and shows their character. 

8 hours ago, PeachJug said:

I've watched everything she's said regarding him, and in no way has she supported his terrible actions. However, she spreads messages that he was a great guy and helped her a lot.

ME: This is where I get conflicted. Even bad people can be good at times, and his help to her seems very deep and important. And sometimes it's ok to appreciate the good side of someone. But is it ok to ignore the dark side? Is it wrong for her to spread support for him (even dedicating/performing songs to commemorate him)? I don't know. Please help me decide.

X was a very caring person, he just had a lot of demons and was a product of his environment (and sadly yes that's a valid reason because a lot of the **** he saw growing up and the way he was raised wasn't your average childhood)

Just realize that he wasn't just the wrong he did...he knew he did wrong and was actually trying to get rid of that negativity. It was cut short by his death. He was a very caring person, who just happened to have a more chaotic past than most. 

So personally I don't think you should let that affect your stanning for Billie. Billie knew X more than you, actually talked to him. If she thinks he was good, then that's her opinion. You don't have to let that affect your enjoyment of her music.

 

[LilyLark 9,694]

10 hours ago, Didymus said:

I don't think Gaga is that unproblematic, actually

— She also worked with Terry and implied that the media (and the models testifying about his abuse) lied about him, even though a few years later she would go viral with her "victims of abuse should always be believed" statements
— She performed in Israel without saying a word about the Israel/Palestine conflict and actually claimed global media lied about Israel being a violent country
— She called for a boycott of the Olympics in Russia because of that country's stance on homosexuality but still accepted a million dollars from Azerbaijan to perform at the Olympics there (also without saying a word), even though that country is just as homophobic
— She called out both Nicki and Katy for copying her looks even though it was obvious they weren't (and in Katy's case it was even worse than that because a few months prior Gaga had that "media pit women against each other, me and Katy should support each other" moment to save Applause)
— Some of her charity work has been questionable to say the least, like how only an undisclosed "portion" of the proceeds of TIHTY went to relevant (unnamed) organizations or when she brought in a camera crew to an LGBT+ homeless shelter to promote her new single
...

My point isn't to blast Gaga but yeah, she could easily be included in your list tbh So I wouldn't sweat it. If you look hard enough there will always be problematic sides to an artist.

Maybe just try to distinguish in your head supporting an artist from enjoying their art

Agree that everyone's problematic to an extent—including Gaga, Rihanna, Katy, and more. I'd actually argue that Billie is less problematic than those three, and she's a kid. I've always thought these "stan" wars to cancel someone were dumb unless the person getting cancelled did something like rape/abuse/explicit bigotry (tho some people are obviously capable of reforming themselves, like Axl Rose and his rejection of his former bigotry), because half the time the person someone is stanning has done something equally problematic. And before someone comes for me, I'm not excusing sh*tty behavior but just pointing out a fact of life about nearly everyone, famous or not.

But I don't think some of these points are fair, are lacking context, or entirely accurate—especially the charity thing. BTWF has an excellent rating, local news organizations have repeatedly covered money they've given out, and the original article was kind of a hatchet job at Gaga at a time when bashing her was a guarantee to get clicks. The Terry thing was  very muddled in retrospect—the actual sexual assault allegations didn't come out in public until 2013. I never thought Gaga implied anything about the models, and I remember the original articles circa early 2013 were framed more as as he pressured some to pose for explicit photos (which of course today would be seen as sexual harassment, but even seven years ago wasn't always seen that way). I also remember one of the first models who spoke out about him called him unprofessional but said he didn't assault or harass her and called it a gray area. Terry didn't truly get exposed until around the DWUW mess, and then Gaga dropped him and R. Kelly at the same time.

Now, the R. Kelly thing was a whole different matter. I still think it's kind of bullsh*t that she became the main symbol of people who worked with him, when huge festivals and other artists worked with him far more and/or after Gaga, but it was it is. At the end of the day, it was still hugely f*cked up on Gaga's part. 

TLDR: Anyway, it what it is and I don't want to start a thread of people dragging Gaga because people love to do it here on GD—especially because I do think Gaga's learned from her f*cks up and some of them occurred when she was not in a great place mentally and therefore wasn't making the best choices. Just wanted to say that I mostly agree, but have a few caveats.

[Didymus 32,745]

40 minutes ago, LilyLark said:

BTWF has an excellent rating, local news organizations have repeatedly covered money they've given out, and the original article was kind of a hatchet job at Gaga at a time when bashing her was a guarantee to get clicks.

What article?   I don't know what you're talking about.

40 minutes ago, LilyLark said:

The Terry thing was  very muddled in retrospect—the actual sexual assault allegations didn't come out in public until 2013.

We were all discussing Terry's allegations from 2011 onwards, please.  The first allegations went public in 2001 but especially in 2009 and 2010 with the allegations of Sena Cech, Jamie Peck, Sarah Hilker and Coco Rocha So what you're saying isn't true, sadly.

[gypsy101 5,423]

8 hours ago, Buddy said:

Why are you acting like Billie is oozing problematic? She ain't Azealia Banks. She likes ONE hip hop artist who is problematic. That's nothing, jeez.

and also he’s literally dead so get over it people

[LilyLark 9,694]

48 minutes ago, Didymus said:

What article?   I don't know what you're talking about.

We were all discussing Terry's allegations from 2011 onwards, please.  The first allegations went public in 2001 but especially in 2009 and 2010 with the allegations of Sena Cech, Jamie Peck, Sarah Hilker and Coco Rocha So what you're saying isn't true, sadly.

Roger whatshisface from an entertainment blog wrote a couple of misleading articles about BTWF, which briefly spread to a few other places and fans picked up on it, although nowadays he speaks highly of BTWF and Gaga. The first article slammed them for spending so much money on lawyers, except it was based off the tax returns from the first year the foundation was set up and every non-grant making foundation (even some grant-making ones) have little out put in the first year and spends a lot of $$$ hammering out the legal aspects. Compare BTWF to most other foundations of a similar nature and the first year tax returns would be nearly identical. The TIHTY thing was similar—in retrospect, BTWF should have been more transparent like they are now—but it was baseless speculation that was before the tax returns even came out for that year and probably wouldn't have happened if Cynthia or the PR had agreed to talk to Roger. Nowadays, BTWF has a good reputation and associates with respected institutions and he leaves it alone/speaks well of it. I remember this specifically because one of my friends was annoyed by the coverage—he worked with a charity at the time and thought much of it was unfair.

I still kind of disagree on when Terry's full depravity was known, but I get your point and I didn't realize some of it was out there so early. I just remember all Coca said was that she wouldn't work with him again, and the tampon story at the time was spun as creepy rather than assault (to be fair, 2019 public standards look at situations differently than 2011). So I still do think some of it was muddled and he wasn't seen as Woody, Roman, R. Kelly back in the day until 2013ish—world leaders would still be photographed by him, for example, and huge celebrities would go to his shows.

Anyway, I don't want to turn this into a let's pick apart Billie, Gaga, etc. thread because that happens too often on GD and I'm not trying to whitewash Gaga's past either (R. Kelley being the big one for me as a fan). Just disagreed slightly with how you framed it.

[doppelganger 3,741]

She's 16.  I mean, c'mon! 

 

[Dukttape 1,437]

15 hours ago, geopang said:

It’s really not that big of a deal. You either like her or you don’t. 

No no... life isn't black and white.

[ZwRaven 331]

16 hours ago, PeachJug said:

Hey guys, I am having a hard time deciding if I can stan billie.

Preface: I know stan culture can be terrible, but it can also be innocent and fun. I guess what I mean by the term is just that I fall completely in love with an artist/their music/their aesthetic/...everything.

So like, I like her music and her artistry a lot. Her vocals are on point, and lyrically she and her brother are super talented. HOWEVER. And I don't know if this is something that I should even care about... but usually I only stan people who I love AS A PERSON, as a non-problematic celebrity. Someone who at least doesn't support harmful things...

HIM: That being said. Her support of XXXTentacion is still preventing me from wanting to fully support her. If you don't know much about him, he had a history of physical violence and crime, including beating his homosexual prison-mate and pregnant girlfriend.

HER: I've watched everything she's said regarding him, and in no way has she supported his terrible actions. However, she spreads messages that he was a great guy and helped her a lot.

ME: This is where I get conflicted. Even bad people can be good at times, and his help to her seems very deep and important. And sometimes it's ok to appreciate the good side of someone. But is it ok to ignore the dark side? Is it wrong for her to spread support for him (even dedicating/performing songs to commemorate him)? I don't know. Please help me decide.

More thoughts:

  Reveal hidden contents

I also stan Amy Winehouse, who as you probably know had a troublesome history as well with alcohol abuse. The thing is, though, she didn't harm others nor did she try to influence others into that life.

Lana Del Rey sometimes glamorizes domestic violence + other strange things, but none of that escapes her artistry. Nothing but expression of her desires/history/conflict, and nothing more tangible than a dream.

Lady Gaga is a perfect example of someone I can EASILY stan without worry. She has used her music and success for philanthropy to help millions. She avoids drama and is one of the least problematic celebrities. She spreads positivity and works to make the world a better place. The most controversial thing she's done is probably work with R Kelly, which was bad in retrospect but did not in any way send support to his actions (which she likely did not know about, nor did the media for what I know). And she has done so much to correct that + work against sexual assault.

My other stans: Lorde, David Bowie, Marina and the Diamonds, Birdy, Adele, Ingrid Michaelson
Other Pending due to possibly problematic: Grimes, Borns, Billie

Another question: Does anyone else do this kind of digging + intense thinking before buying albums/following on social media/stanning? am i weird

 

TLDR: Billie supported XXXTentacion, so I am unsure if I should stan her despite liking her music.

I'll give you a much bigger one although he has now passed. Michael Jackson. I LOVE his music, but I just don't know if I can listen to it anymore. Granted nothing has been proven, but there is sooooo much smoke, and it would be really hard for all of those people esp the two on the HBO doc to just make up all those graphic details. So what do I do w the king of pop?

[drunkygagaa 275]

I like her music very much but not someone I would stan.

 

[elijahfan 23,564]

You think way too much tbh....

[Bizcochito 5,313]

21 hours ago, Didymus said:

I don't think Gaga is that unproblematic, actually

— She also worked with Terry and implied that the media (and the models testifying about his abuse) lied about him, even though a few years later she would go viral with her "victims of abuse should always be believed" statements
— She performed in Israel without saying a word about the Israel/Palestine conflict and actually claimed global media lied about Israel being a violent country
— She called for a boycott of the Olympics in Russia because of that country's stance on homosexuality but still accepted a million dollars from Azerbaijan to perform at the Olympics there (also without saying a word), even though that country is just as homophobic
— She called out both Nicki and Katy for copying her looks even though it was obvious they weren't (and in Katy's case it was even worse than that because a few months prior Gaga had that "media pit women against each other, me and Katy should support each other" moment to save Applause)
— Some of her charity work has been questionable to say the least, like how only an undisclosed "portion" of the proceeds of TIHTY went to relevant (unnamed) organizations or when she brought in a camera crew to an LGBT+ homeless shelter to promote her new single
...

My point isn't to blast Gaga but yeah, she could easily be included in your list tbh So I wouldn't sweat it. If you look hard enough there will always be problematic sides to an artist.

Maybe just try to distinguish in your head supporting an artist from enjoying their art

TEA ****ING SPILLED. 

Y'all do the most to drag a 17 years old woman but choose to ignore Gaga's problematic actions. Gaga KNEW about what R.Kelly did, yet she support him. And she was like 27 at the time.