Is Taylor sincere with her inclusivity protocol or is it just her business agenda?

[The Music Industry]

18 minutes ago, Aristotle said:

Not if she did apply diversity in early 2010s. 

So you'd rather she just continued using non-diverse acts in her music videos then? Like...

[Qudron]

In case you haven't noticed, labels have figured out that teenage girls grow up and stop spending money on merch, albums, concerts eventually but gays will still put on some Christina Aguilera song from 2002 on a random tuesday. That's why every pop girl tries to brand herself as queen of gays. 

[midnightdawn]

It seems performative.

[Aethereal]

8 minutes ago, The Music Industry said:

So you'd rather she just continued using non-diverse acts in her music videos then? Like...

 I said she would not be accused of using minorities for business agenda had she applied diversity earlier in her career. At least not as much. Not sure where you got that. 

[Homebrand]

4 hours ago, byzantium said:

I’m not the one arguing that anyone is not genuine here.  Remember that.  I just think it is ironic because what you said applies to Rihanna more so than Taylor.  Rihanna is after all the most capitalistic MPG.

Rihanna is a black woman that made cosmetics for people of colour and was forefront in changing the beauty industry to be more inclusive. There is nothing ''ironic'' about those statements, you guys are whack  

[byzantium]

24 minutes ago, Homebrand said:

Rihanna is a black woman that made cosmetics for people of colour and was forefront in changing the beauty industry to be more inclusive. There is nothing ''ironic'' about those statements, you guys are whack  

Go back and read what they wrote.  

[alestevens]

According to ATRL, it looks like its extremely sincere. I read here everyday that Taylor is as huge as she is only because she is the sole popstar who is found to be appealing to the far right and white conservatives, so anything she does highlighting minorities would be a huge risk for herself taking that into account.

 

On the other hand, most of your faves end up underperforming or straight up bombing whenever they "pander to the LGBTQ+", so i definitely dont think anyone would do that in an attempt to find success

[Headlock]

2 hours ago, RihFenty20 said:

Except I didn’t even drag her. I literally just said that she’s a machine that’s doing it to appease the masses because diversity is trendy right now. I even went as far as saying that she isn’t the only one, and that she’s simply following a standard set by society to show that my response wasn’t intended to bash her in anyway. If you took that as an attack based on my history, then it’s on you. But in this one case there was no malicious intent. I was simply responding to the OP. 

No malicious intent… yet you seemed to bristle when it was pointed out your comment could easily be posted in a Rihanna thread and no one would be the wiser 

[Robert]

if she wasn’t inclusive, she’d be called a bigot and when she is, she’s called ingenious. Seems like she can’t win either way. I’m glad she’s giving representation to minorities and sharing her platform will only help her collaborators. 
 

Also cringing at people calling diversity a trend as if Trans people aren’t being attacked more than ever or police brutality wasn’t at an all time high last year.

[Homebrand]

1 hour ago, byzantium said:

Go back and read what they wrote.  

Yes I’m aware, but I’m addressing your comments not the person you quoted. 

[modeblock]

It started off shakey and messy, but I think she's genuine about it, and it feels more natural now. I do think she's a good person under her narcissistic qualities and obsession with success, by that I mean it can be both. She can appreciate the inclusivity and the socially positive effects of her decisions to be inclusive, while also being aware that it puts her in a favorable light in a business sense. 

[Mr.Link]

ATRL is running out of ideas to try to discredit this woman. The hypocrisy when half this site is drooling over Harry Styles’ pandering ass

[Bussea]

9 hours ago, Headlock said:

You making this thread is certainly proving you have an agenda 

Literally

[Marianah Adkins]

Its both.

 

To be fair, who cares if its a business agenda. Taylor is one of those artists imo who is better off not pulling politically charged messaging in her songs. She never did once proclaim to be an activist throughout most of her career and she was only forced to do it in Lover bec a lot of people were calling her out on it. And she’s better off doing that cuz her “political songs” and attempts at being woke were what ruined Lover. I dont know if this will sound offensive but what makes her music appealing and great is her authenticity and how her authentic thoughts are universally relatable. Her “political songs” dont feel as authentic and thats alright. 

Its great that she is speaking out more about issues but it doesnt necessarily mean she has to incorporate it more on her music bluntly. Its nice that she is showing more representation to trans men in her MVs. 

[MissedTheTrain]

14 hours ago, Aristotle said:

Not if she did apply diversity in early 2010s. She did not call Trump in 2016 or 2015 like most celebrities did. I do agree that many celebrities that did start appearing more inclusive towards minorities BEFORE her are nearly as much infested in business agenda as Taylor is. It's just that Taylor is more cautious (this part also includes the timing of her inclusivity) in her imagine that makes her more obvious than others.

Taylor was honest in her doc about why she didn't speak out sooner, and she heavily regretted it.  Even when she got to the point where she couldn't stay silent anymore, her team sat her down and tried to tell her not to.

[Rep2000]

19 hours ago, velocity said:

Hasn't she dated only white guys? Idk it feels weird and forced to me.

Dating people only for inclusivity's sake is even more grossed and forced to me. But so is judging someone's racial dating history.

[dumbsparce]

She's too self-absorbed to even think of minorities, let alone hate on them so I'd say it's performative bc she knows she has to roll with the times. At least she's providing work for people of all kinds of backgrounds so there's that.

[littlebodybigheart]

the fact that you don’t even think these people got on the taylor swift videos cause of their talent but rather because of their sexual identity or the color of their skin as a “pity” job is…kinda weird.

[Chris]

What a stupid thread.

 

 

Some people need their thread making privileges revoked IMMEDIATELY.

 

 

[Stimulus]

It's always nice to see an artist with a powerful platform using it to defend a marginalized group against bigotry. If an artist is able to make a profit out of advancing civil rights, that's a win-win for everyone and I don't see the problem.

[Rider]

13 minutes ago, Stimulus said:

It's always nice to see an artist with a powerful platform using it to defend a marginalized group against bigotry. If an artist is able to make a profit out of advancing civil rights, that's a win-win for everyone and I don't see the problem.

Like...

I honestly don't see how else she could go about it. 

This isn't a problem.

[Theshigo Washidu]

Business agenda.

 

She didn't start trying to be inclusive until being inclusive became more of a thing.

[KatyPrismSpirit]

4 hours ago, Chris said:

What a stupid thread.

 

 

Some people need their thread making privileges revoked IMMEDIATELY.

 

 

nobody will silence KPS babes

 

[whtvrdude]

22 hours ago, naval23 said:

Both can be true at the same time 

that part

[terrorblade]

it's so obviously the latter