MattieB Posted August 7 Posted August 7 1 hour ago, PoisonedIvy said: I'm not afrolatino, that's a term reserved for Latinos that are black. The Hispanic side of my family are mestizo. My grandparents nor my father are black, therefore my Latin heritage is not the same as someone that is actually afrolatino. How can you police someone's racial identity when it's a social construct, anyway? If society sees me as a black man, I was raised as a black man, and I perceive myself as a black man… in what world do you have the right to deny that? THEN YOU ARE NOT BLACK lmfao. Thank you for spelling it out to me. Why cant you just be biracial and leave it at that? As I said if you choose to see yourself as black that's fine, I'm not policing that but to me and a majority of black folks you're not black. You're mixed race 1
Wicked Posted August 7 Posted August 7 34 minutes ago, MattieB said: Biracials are only black in the us due to the one drop rule, which is VERY RACIST in its nature, a lot of black folks are disavowing themselves from that mess, as I said they are BIRACIAL, their race is BIRACIAL not black, if you arent white why would you be black. Black mixed with something doesn't automatically make it black. You can definitely identify with it, that doesn't mean you are By this logic,Malcolm X isn't a Black man. I'm sorry but this is actually quite backwards, and an unfortunate trend. 3
Elusive Chanteuse Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Her lack of talent in performing and singing I think would be the main thing. 1 1
Namie-Knowles Posted August 7 Posted August 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, MattieB said: Biracials are only black in the us due to the one drop rule, which is VERY RACIST in its nature, a lot of black folks are disavowing themselves from that mess, as I said they are BIRACIAL, their race is BIRACIAL not black, if you arent white why would you be black. Black mixed with something doesn't automatically make it black. You can definitely identify with it, that doesn't mean you are I can see what you're saying and agree to an extent. My take is since race isn't a real thing and more so a social construct based on phenotypical expression, if society percieves and treats you as Black then you are Black. If two white people have a child that comes out looking exactly like Rihanna, that's a Black child not a white one. Calling that child white wouldn't be doing them or anyone else any favors. Edited August 7 by Namie-Knowles
Shinkirou Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Because she's not pushing music forward. She's not an innovator like MJ or Madonna were. 1 1
MattieB Posted August 7 Posted August 7 26 minutes ago, Wicked said: By this logic,Malcolm X isn't a Black man. I'm sorry but this is actually quite backwards, and an unfortunate trend. Malcom was over 75% black, his mom was biracial, and I explicitly stated anyone with more than 50% admixture of negro is BLACK
Wicked Posted August 7 Posted August 7 6 minutes ago, MattieB said: Malcom was over 75% black, his mom was biracial, and I explicitly stated anyone with more than 50% admixture of negro is BLACK You know this how,did he take a DNA test? If his mom isn't Black according to you,then he isn't Black. 1
MattieB Posted August 7 Posted August 7 4 minutes ago, Wicked said: You know this how,did he take a DNA test? If his mom isn't Black according to you,then he isn't Black. MISS MAAM, whats not clicking? if you're 50% or less white you would NOT be called white, same goes for asian, arab, indian etc, why should you be considered black? As I said the history of the one drop rule was founded on racism, it stated one drop of African blood tainted your ENTIRE gene pool. This is something we're trying to unlearn 1
bielneira Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Because not even Madonna could be as big as Michael Jackson 2
Avenger Posted August 8 Posted August 8 Because she isn't, Taylor is definitely quite big but never can be big as MJ! MJ had a big crossover appeal and dominated the world with his dancing and music it's not the same for Taylor at all! 1
Joaco95 Posted August 8 Posted August 8 she lacks his artistry/craft and cultural impact (she has the sales and popularity tho) also 1
Strawberry Bubble Posted August 8 Posted August 8 She's not as big as MJ, and that's okay. MJ might be the only true monocultural artist we've ever had. It can be hard for English-speaking people to grasp this, but Taylor Swift is relatively unknown in many parts of the world because the market is so fragmented today. Back in the day, everyone knew who Michael Jackson was. 2
MattieB Posted August 9 Posted August 9 19 hours ago, Joaco95 said: she lacks his artistry/craft and cultural impact (she has the sales and popularity tho) also Please dont start with this delusional bullshit, this is just as bad as the Taylor Swift comparison 1
AshleyLovescats887 Posted August 9 Posted August 9 In my opinion, Taylor Swift is actually very popular, similarly to MJ. 'Taymania' is officially an actual term to describe the craze over Eras Tour and her current world breaking records are extremely impressive, considering that artists' music is no longer actually forced to be listened to due to the streaming era. The sales are actually quite unbelievable, regardless of the variants or remixes as music in the past had them. Plus Taylor Swift is now considered to be "the average popstar" that people think of, which just says about how much impact she has over the WHOLE world, something that even big artist could only dream of. So imo Taylor is as popular as MJ or any other now iconic artists like The Beetles or Madonna, but wtf do i know 1
awesomepossum Posted August 9 Posted August 9 On 8/5/2024 at 12:20 AM, Sheep said: Because being the first of anything puts you on a different level. Taylor is living up to his numbers in a way, but the things she's achieving are following a trail he blazed for all pop superstars 40 years ago. It's nothing we haven't seen before. She's the biggest since Madonna and Michael Jackson, they will always be the touchstone for all major pop legends until somebody reinvents what it means to be a top tier recording artist in the way they did. What about Elvis and The Beatles?
awesomepossum Posted August 9 Posted August 9 On 8/5/2024 at 7:22 AM, Charmed Life said: "Swift drove the evolution of music distribution, perception, and consumption across the 2000s, 2010s, and 2020s, and has used social media to spotlight issues within the industry and society at large. Wielding a strong economic and political leverage, she prompted reforms to recording, streaming and distribution structures for greater artists' rights, increased awareness of creative ownership in terms of masters and intellectual property, and has led the vinyl revival Her consistent commercial success is considered unprecedented by journalists, with simultaneous achievements in album sales, digital sales, streaming, airplay, record charts and touring. Good for her, However, there's a vast difference between making an impact with your God given talent and what's written in that paragraph above. It's also overblown and not really very accurate. 2
awesomepossum Posted August 9 Posted August 9 On 8/5/2024 at 7:26 AM, PoisonedIvy said: People won't give Taylor her flowers until she's gone. That's just the way the world works unfortunately. People knew MJ was a big deal when he was alive and working 2
Sheep Posted August 10 Posted August 10 39 minutes ago, awesomepossum said: What about Elvis and The Beatles? Genre differences aside, Michael was a different breed of celebrity. He was inarguably the most famous person in the world for decades in his life and is still, in death is one of the biggest celebrities. The cult of celebrity he cultivated was on a completely different level and something that modern artists still strive for, in spite of the fact we all know it killed him and ruined the lives of almost everybody he held dear. The Beatles released 12 albums in 7 years. Michael released 6 albums in 22 years. The Beatles have sold ~600m, Michael ~500m. If you start digging into EPs and compilations(which are included in the album sales figures), it starts skewing multiplicatively towards The Beatles. Michael could hold the world's attention for years at a time with one release, and every album was an expansive, year+ multi-media experience. His peak with Thriller-Bad alone was longer than the Beatles entire run as a band. He held the world's attention for much, much, much longer and also saw much, much, much more success with each individual project of his(including the biggest album of all time). I'm not touching Elvis because he's the definition of local and made The Beatles release schedule look like Adele's. There's also the fact that the way he promoted a release was closer to Taylor Swift than Elvis. He practically invented the music video as we know it today and his promotional tours and advertising deals had an insane reach. Even the idea of a single, year long tour spanning the whole world or being tied a specific album didn't really exist with The Beatles. You could drop any post-Motown Michael Jackson "era", music, tour, and promotions into 2024 and it would still be hugely successful. You could NOT do this with any artist before him. 2
Storm653 Posted August 10 Posted August 10 (edited) Taylor will never be as big as MJ. Nobody will. Only the Beatles are bigger in record sales but even they probably aren't as famous as MJ in 3rd world countries. But that's okay. Taylor is still having a strong career that's sustainable and not caught up in the same type of PR messes that MJ was in from the 90's and onward. Some of you keep bringing up MJ's performances and iconic videos but guess what? Ed Sheeran is more globally dominant than many of our faves too and he's more vanilla than people claim Taylor is. Taylor might not reach the level of being a household name to grandmas in non-English speaking countries but most MPGs in general aren't on that level. Even Beyonce is still seen as the "Single Ladies" girl or a 3 hit wonder in most parts of Latin America excluding Brazil by the GP and Gaga, Adele, and Rihanna are more musically popular than her in Spanish speaking countries to this very day. You can add Dua Lipa and others too. Global recognition is good but it's not everything. Having a long lasting run, becoming a big touring force, and having a decent number of quality albums is enough to have a seat at the Pop legend table. Edited August 10 by Storm653 1
duybeeGAshantiGA Posted August 10 Posted August 10 On 8/5/2024 at 6:26 PM, PoisonedIvy said: People won't give Taylor her flowers until she's gone. That's just the way the world works unfortunately. People have been giving MJ flowers since Ben, when he was 14
Aden Posted August 10 Posted August 10 Taylor could sell 300 million more records than MJ ever did and she still wouldn't be bigger than him. Taylor is absolutely a commercial phenomenon but that's quite literally where it stops. On top of being commercially huge, MJ was changing the landscape, boasting numerous talents, and influencing everyone and their mother. Taylor is not pushing the envelope on anything. She's not changing pop or its sound. She is quite literally just popular. 4
Brooklyn Baby Posted August 10 Posted August 10 The ability of people on ATRL to derail conversations and topics into something completely off topic needs to be studied
Rev8 Posted August 10 Posted August 10 The last thing I expected from this thread, is users arguing about who is black what is going awn here
MistressKay Posted August 11 Posted August 11 Because her music lacks the substance and impact. And her life story is nowhere near as iconic Let's be honest. No one is gonna be making specials and documentaries about shake it off or whatever else she sings 40 years from now. Thriller is just THAT ALBUM. Along with his long discography. His image is also so timeless. The dance moves. The performances. Taylor is just a perfect media storm. She def will be studied on how she became a phenomenon and honestly I want to see explained as well cause it boggles my mind so much. 1 2
ben-0_0 Posted August 11 Posted August 11 On 8/5/2024 at 11:17 AM, dirrtydiana said: she's not even bigger than legend Shania Twain let alone MJ even BRAT over shadowed her current variant album Some sense in here Taylor is a Paula Abdul level talent and success Streaming could never come close to sales, her 'success' is completely a product of marketing hype 1
Recommended Posts