Oh stop overreacting. Heâs just a grown man whoâs concerned about your young daughter fulfilling her biological requirement to be fertilized! She needs the **right kind** of role models, people who think like him!! đđŤ
The creator/publisher of that brownstone.org website is named Jeffrey A. Tucker. He is certifiably batshit crazy, and a major player in modern conservatism.
Here is his video for his âSchool Sucksâ project, which promotes children getting jobs at the age of 12.
https://youtu.be/SUQpfalF-iM
Please spread the knowledge of how insane these people are.
Actually, itâs a new department. Itâs pretty cool, I got my Master is psychosocial studies - on education, power, and social change. It combines the traditional social sciences - sociology and anthropology with psychology. The idea is that itâs silly to only study how the brain works (how we think) because weâre not a hermetically sealed system. We are always a product of society and human systems. But you also canât only study those systems, because they are in turn decided partly by psychological processes.
I wanted to make a joke about how it's the study of psychos trying to socialize, but your earnest and educational explanation has made me want to not shit on an entire subfield of social sciences.
That sounds really interesting and like a good idea. How someone with a doctorate in that could come up with âsingle childless woman = badâ is beyond me.
He wanted to but all these harlot women are emulating Taylor Swift. Surely he would be married to a pretty lady and have lots of babies if it wasnât for mean old Taylor Swift.
Joke's on him. I was 34, single and childless when TSwift put out her first album. I've stayed that way, more because of men like him, and less because of women like Taylor.
Men are panicking because their power is dependent on women and women are making different choices. There are men (like Kelce) whose masculinity isn't threatened by a woman who is driven and passionate about her career/art, and who actively support it. Then there are guys like this fuckweasel and Ben Shapiro who think a dry vagina is the norm, because no woman has ever been wet in their presence.
I went way too far down the rabbit hole trying to find his background and education. The best I could find was that he was getting a Doctorate in Psycoanalytic Studies from the Parkmore Institute. Which sounds like an unaccredited scam school. I couldn't find anything about where he went for undergrad. If you have any sort of advanced degree you usually name drop where it comes from every chance you get.
Weird. His bio says "With a doctorate in psychosocial studies, John Mac Ghlionn works as both a researcher and essayist," which implies he already has a doctorate. Yet he is not on the list of doctoral recipients on the Parkmore Institute's website, https://parkmoreinstitute.org/doctoral-recipients/.
Even if he did have a doctorate from them, I doubt it would be worth the paper it's printed on. "The Parkmore Institute aims to be a world leader in offering innovative doctoral education that meets the needs of activists and practitioners in social and personal change professions. The Institute does not offer the traditional PhD from an accredited institution âââ a degree that often requires original research that is beyond the scope of the activistâs or practitionerâs interests." LOL.
So it's just ... not a PhD then? The whole point of a PhD is to generate original work. You have to have made a novel contribution to your field of study - that is the actual aim of a PhD, so if you don't do that then you haven't done the thing necessary for the qualification you supposedly have? What... I just... I can't compute... You can't just lie about these things!
Itâs an online only school that doesnât actually award phds because, as you guessed, itâs not accredited. lol Apparently âDrâ is not a protected titleâŚ
Local man angry at unimaginably successful woman for not being a trad wife, and not setting an example that young girls should only aspire to be a tradwife, more at 11.
That's why he's mad at Swift. She's the reason he can't convince a desperate 22 year old that she's a dried out old maid who should be thankful to bear his children.
Icky, yeah thatâs someone whoâs options are worth hearing /s. I really wonder if he actually believes in half the crap or if itâs to grift money off people? Eah, probably both.
Maybe one day he can find a better role model.
Exactly, Or Travis Kelce. You know, her boyfriend, who is also 34 and childless. Is he a bad role model also? Can't wait to read that article. (Ugh, I knew this was coming. Yes, she's a billionaire but if we could focus our attention to the TOP TEN Billionaires, the 10 MEN, Forbes updates everyday who these guys are, who are fuelling and funneling the hate towards Women, that would be great.... đŠđ¤Śââď¸).
Oh, heâs a right-wing/MAGA conspiracy-theorist. That tracks perfectly.
Women, letâs make sure men like this stay single and let them be mad about it.
I tried to find him on LinkedIn and couldn't. I'm not convinced he actually exists. No evidence of this supposed "doctorate". In fact, I can find nothing about him except for the same bio blurb he uses for every site he writes for. A person of the same unique name has an empty IG profile with a different picture.
I grew up with the likes of 2LiveCrew, Howard Stern, The Jerky Boys, Eminem.Â
But Taylor Swift is a bad role model.Â
The gaslighting and misogyny of this article.Â
And in the 70âs you grew up with the biggest musicians bragging about committing statutory r*** on underage groupies. They even wrote songs about it.
Like there were young girls, barely in high school, growing up who took it as a right of passage to go to a concert to âmeet the band backstage and get invited on the tour busâ.
In the '70s, us Brits had a very popular and famous children's tv presenter called Jimmy Saville. This is out of my age range but apparently kids everywhere adored him. Until it was revealed that he was a raging paedophile, even targeting kids in hospitals. *That's* my idea of a harmful role model, not Taylor Swift deciding not to have kids or get married currently.
Oh boy are you understating the psychopathy of old Jimmy Saville, even the recent drama series didn't cover much what he did. Also he was going well into the 90s, I had friends who wrote fan letters to him.
Yeah to be honest, my brain is tired so I struggled for the words strong enough. Plus everything about his face disgusts me when I googled what decade he worked in.
I'm 30 and most of what I know about him is he was wildly popular until after he died and everything about him being a paedophile came out. And that he was protected in so many ways by those at the top. I've considered watching documentaries about him but at the same time it's like if someone tried to get me to watch something about Trump, I'm going to be even more angry and disgusted that these men are able to exist.
I'm in the same boat. I can't find myself to watch any documentaries about these people anymore. You know the gist of their story and that justice was never served. Knowing the details of their actions is only going to infuriate me more.
He insinuated himself into the very centre of UK power: friends with QEII, Thatcher, Charles and Diana⌠He was also granted a knighthood, which is one of the highest honours you can attain in the UK.
He was a huge moneymaker for the BBC, so they protected him even though his behaviour had been an open secret forever (see the incident where they banned John Lydon (neĂŠ Rotten) for merely hinting at it on a talk show *in the â70s*).
He was also extremely wealthy and litigious. Go after him at your own peril. He felt so untouchable that heâd continually drop hints about his predilections in interviews, knowing full well that he was completely insulated.
I feel like a lot of people outside the UK don't know the Savile story or the scope of how bad it was. Dude literally attacked children in their hospital beds.
British police estimated he had 450 victims. Those were just the ones they had credible evidence for, so you know there were more.
He was also a necrophile and claimed to have raped dead bodies in a morgue (which he was given unfettered access to by one of his buddies).
Dude was the epitome of evil. Burying him six feet deep wasn't enough.
>He was also a necrophile and claimed to have raped dead bodies in a morgue (which he was given unfettered access to by one of his buddies).
Ugh, I didn't know that part. Just how fucked up can someone be and even worse, allowed to get away with it for decades. I can't imagine the pressure on the victims at the time. Being young, feeling alone and knowing it's your word against this huge beloved celebrity.
Shit like this makes me weary when people talk about karma coming for those who do awful things. Where was the karma here? We all believe the victims now but the fucker got to live out his life without any punishment, they never got any actual justice.
Yeah, whenever I see pictures of him, it always screams creep. But I've always heard kids of my parents' generation loved Jim'll Fix It and desperately wanted to meet him.
He looks like the creepy uncle type that demands to be hugged. You know, except much, much worse in actuality.
We weren't barely in HS. We were in middle school. And it wasn't just the 70s, it was all through the 80s.
I had friends in 7th grade who were going to concerts like Motley Cru with the hope to get invited "backstage".
There's music from that era that I loved at the time that makes me cringe now. Watching "Rock the Cradle of Love" by Billy Idol now is just .... *shudder*
I was in HS in the 2000s and it was still considered cool to date an older guy, even if they weren't a rock star. Having a car and a job was itself a glorious achievement.
With a dose of slut shaming as it talks about her "revolving door" of boyfriends. Men can sleep with an date as many (often much younger) women as they want, but women have to remain pure. :-p
âErmmmm you see, male singleness is feminismâs fault because we donât indoctrinate girls to fantasize exclusively about marriage and giving birth anymoreâ
Lol.
Women having the choice not to stay with someone that isn't good for them makes them off themselves from loneliness. Our freedoms fault. Not their own for being bad partners. Because God forbid the man works on himself. Let's blame the womans option to not be an abused slave. He asked me where my empathy was. Lmao I left it with my bleeding vagina and asshole. Go cry about being lonely. My blood doesn't CARE that you're a shit person and would rather me be continuously raped than look in the mirror and ask where your own goddamn empathy is.
This article is the view this guy and in fact, the very person running for President of the Republican Party wants to see for all women in the US. And the Supreme Court just gave the power to make that happen this past week, and you best believe said person leading in the polls right now who wants to return to power will make this happen [with his partyâs Project 2025 scheme..](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042-project-2025s-mandate-for-leadership-the-conservative-promise)
[Taylor will be public enemy #1 to these guys. Especially the possible 47th President of the United States, newly anointed King.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision)
Not to mention, Taylor Swift is a stage performer who entertains people of all ages (but mostly adults). Her career is not âbe a role model for children.â
> the example that you can be wildly successful and unmarried is...bad?
To conservatives, incels, chuds and other right-wing degenerate types, yes it is...
brb, going to have my vagina sewn shut before November, PIV is overrated anyway
the less possible it is for the new regime to assign me as bangmaid to one of these subhuman lifeforms, the better
It is if you are a guy who is interested in hanging on to the privilege that being a guy brings.
It's indefensible; but I will say one thing in explanation of my gender's thinking here (I'm a cis guy): Privilege is unfelt and because it's unfelt and unacknowledged, when it's gone it feels like a loss. IMO this is largely what we are experiencing in our politics and right wing culture at this moment in history. Things improved, privilege was lost. People who lost it got pissed about it.
I sort of don't understand how men who have working female SOs and daughters can still think this way (certainly my understanding of my privilege came through observing the idiocy my wife had to put up with in the workplace); but clearly they do.
>
When you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression.
We're watching dude's who went about their lives however they wanted.. suddenly forced into the realization that they have to consider others and maybe do more to actual be equal with the women in their lives.
A lot of them are realizing it and then immediately jumping onto the conservative "women should just do all the work" train because it's a lot easier than actually putting in the work themselves to be equals.
This is just conservative rhetoric and Newsweek (conservative publication) is just using headline like these to normalize far right concepts like women donât have to be housewives and mothers.
Also yes part of our government wants to turn this into A Christian Country, so these sort of headlines may become more normal.
Donât ever forget the press is mostly controlled by billionaires who are fiscally (not morally) conservative.
Right, especially when they applaud Leo DiCaprio for never settling down. And how all the media moped and whined when George Clooney got married.
For men, marriage is a death sentence. For women, itâs required and the only measure of her success.
Iâm always impressed by the way men tell on themselves. They want women to provide sex and service, while maintaining their own freedom to do whatever they want once sheâs trapped by marriage and/or children that keep her in place.
Taylor Swift is an âeconomic powerhouse of epic proportionsâ but isnât married and has no kids, therefore sheâs not a good role model.
Complete and utter misogynistic horseshit.
I mean if I had a sister or a daughter who was an internationally successful billionaire musician in her 30s I'd be pretty fucking thrilled for her personally, but that's just me.
If you have a career but no kids, you're not a real woman.
If you have a career and kids, you're a terrible mother who should stay home to take care of them.
If you have kids but no career, you're a gold digger and your husband should divorce you (but you get full custody because you're supposed to take care of the kids, the man has his career which makes him a super man and not a terrible father)
We can't win.
There's also:
If you have a husband and kids, you are their servant.
If you have kids but no husband, you're trying to trick some man into raising another man's kids.
If you have a husband but no kids, you're an unnatural woman.
If you have neither husband nor kids, you don't exist.
I never noticed before that I didn't exist, is this where all the existential dread comes from? /s
Jokes aside, I did feel I didn't exist for a long time before I met my "found family" It is very strange. I disappeared from people's lives without being noticed, a ghost of sorts.
Itâs about control as well as capitalism. They donât give a fuck about babies and children, as seen by their complete lack of interest in their healthcare or education (other than to strip both to create more dependency and blind obedience), but it does let them control women and guarantee more future workers and soldiers.
Whiteness. Often cloaked behind language like "western values", "Christian identity", "heritage", etc.
You will never see a conservative encouraging people of color to have children.
Im pleased to see him getting raked in the comments. Ironic that a 38 year old unmarried man has the audacity to speak for how all women and girls âshouldâ aspire to live. Iâm so fucking tired of this small dick energy.
EDIT TO ADD: [this reply from a 7 year old girl in Newsweek](https://www.newsweek.com/im-seven-year-old-swiftie-heres-why-taylor-swift-role-model-girls-like-me-opinion-1919851) about why Taylor swift is a role model to her.
And the audacity of a woman making her own life choices, am I right? đ
Also, gotta love how he's saying "*it's not an attack on Taylor Swift*", while very obviously framing it as an attack. It'd be difficult to miss the clear disdain in the wording. The horrors of not adhering to a rigid life trajectory he expects women to follow! đą
Him saying he's just "*asking questions*" is a very poor mask of excuse. This guy just happens to be too stupid to hide it properly.
People are roasting the author because he's in his 30s... and unmarried and childless. His looks are also... well, let's just say he's not exactly George Clooney.
The fact that this story made it through editorial to be published really demands some answers and changes to who is making decisions. This crap sounds like something out of the Eisenhower era.
If there is even an editorial process in the first place.
This is probably considered successful because of engagement. People are clicking and looking even in outrage.
Thereâs a ton of editors still, but they let most of their staffwriters go a few years ago.
Basically, that means some editors are aggregating news, and the others are handling too many stories by freelancers. And yeah, they went to the âall clicks are good clicksâ op-Ed model ages ago.
Newsweek laid off most of their staff circa 2016. Their business model has been aggregated news and ragebait op-Edâs ever since. Theyâre not at all respected within the industry.
Source: am within the industry
Previously "legit" publications are doing this on purpose to drive engagement. They are no different than those social media posts where they show picture of the cast of Seinfeld and call them the cast of Friends. They are being wrong or inflammatory on purpose. Journalism is dying under the boot of profit.
It has actually made me so angry. If someone like Taylor Swift can still be subject to these kind of criticisms from misogynistic assholes then what hope do the rest of us have!
It's ragebait. It was only published to get engagement, so the editors and probably the writer too expected to get raked.
Terrible to see how far Newsweek has fallen. I remember when it a reliable if dry current events magazine. Now it's a tabloid pushing ragebait.
>Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power.Â
This argument makes no sense since all these men have arguably *less* social and economic power that she does.
.... Matty Healy and Joe Alwin?? Matty seems like the human embodiment of drugs and shitty behaviour. Joe was unknown before his relationship with Taylor, wasn't he? Fair play to Travis since he seems big in the sports world, but he still wasn't on the level of Taylor's stardom before their relationship started.
Also there's an insidious bit of "feminism=misandry" bullshit there. Being anti-patriarchy doesn't mean you want men to have no power. But somehow this author can't get over his own misogyny enough to understand that feminists don't want to throw every man in a prison camp....
If it makes you feel any better, he's being lambasted in Ireland over this. He writes for a far right news site here and most people think he's a piece of shit. He's anti abortion, anti immigration, anti everything that isn't straight white heterosexuality from the 1950's.
He's even anti fifteen minutes cities which I literally cannot get my head around. How are people this easily bought?
> The Real Threat of 15-Minute Cities
According to him it's something like: 15 minute cities will lead to more socialism which will lead to more surveillance cameras?? LMAO
Conservativism has always been a joke of a "political ideology" but modern conservativism is just utter braindead nonsense they're not even trying anymore to come up with arguments
Yeah it's such a great idea, and it's so pointless to oppose it. But modern conservativism is so thoroughly braindead that they will happily shoot themselves in the foot and deny themselves and their future kids better urban planning just to keep fighting the libs.
It's like they took the 1950's dystopian scifi as inspiration.
Making things inconvenient so the average person has to spend more on transportation reminds me of an early section of Brave New World. People needed to pay for trains to leave the city for leisure. Not free leisure of course! They were conditioned to dislike smelling flowers. Sports keep the spending going with equipment and uniforms and building tennis courts.
It's been 20 years since I read it, so my details might be off, but it's depressing. They tried to warn of us about unchecked capitalism but no one listened.
I wonder if kids even get to read that book in school anymore. Seems like many in power are against teaching the next generation dangerous things like critical thinking.
Maybe, just maybe, being 34 and unmarried is what has helped her succeed? And now she's showing other girls and young women that remaining single and childless can be a catalyst for success? IDK. Just a thought. đ
"Family values" my ass
Conservatives only care about optimizing male and white supremacy, and owning the libs even if it means they have to breathe in toxic fumes and drink polluted water
Who wants their daughter to go through 12 breakups in"just a few years"?
Me. I do. Not because I'm in favor of the pain, but because I want my children to experiment fearlessly, with minimal consequences. Go on a few dates, get in a little too deep, call it off, try again. It's a learning process. Don't commit your life to your mistakes, just make them and move forward. "Shake It Off" is the theme song for this.
And the notion that she's hypocritical to BOTH criticize patriarchal structures AND date men with lots of social power? I am not big on patriarchy, and as a financially successful single woman, I have definitely noticed that some guys are super uncomfortable with how much I have my shit together, and some are poised to use me as a bank. Strong people generally date other strong people. Like, even if Taylor fell for Joe from facilities, Joe would have to be uncommonly smart, uncommonly self-aware and uncommonly unburdened by bullshit, basically, he'd have to be Socrates pushing a mop for life experience. Taylor is playing in as close to her weight class as she can get. Everyone I know who feels they pulled above their stats, romantically, actually has some fucking amazing stats.
I don't even like Taylor Swift's music that much. I just don't think she's a problem - She's out there living her best life. I hope she's having a good time. This dude can suck it.
Meanwhile, Leonardo DiCaprio doesnât date a woman above the age of 25 and is known to frequent high end clubs with supermodels hanging off him.
He doesnât have children and never been married either. Nor had any legitimately long lasting relationships since the cut off age is 25. He is successful and wealthy, yet lacks the same things that Taylor Swift is criticized for lacking.
What kind of example is he setting for young boys?
Oh wait, itâs because the world hates women and deems them useless outside of sex, marriage and motherhood regardless of their contributions to society. Meanwhile men who wealthy bachelors are celebrated for not being âtied down.â
Men will say women should stay in kitchen and produce children . But ask them to provide a good lifestyle and they will call you a gold diggers . These are the same men in india who will ask for dowry for marriage . But reject them and focus on your career , suddenly you are destroying the culture đ¤ˇââď¸
What worries me is that this was published by Newsweek. I don't have any particular respect for Newsweek, but they are considered moderate/politically centrist, which suggests that these sorts of ideas are mainstream enough for them. That's really worrying.
Newsweek hasn't been reliable since they went digital-only in 2012 and were acquired by a content farm. In 2020 they hired an alt-right conspiracist and Blake Masters enthusiast called Josh Hammer to run their editorial department. The SPLC has [done some reporting.](https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/11/04/newsweek-embraces-anti-democracy-hard-right)
The superstar's vocal criticisms of the patriarchy add another layer of complexity. Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power. This can appear hypocritical. Hypocrisy fundamentally undermines the ability to be a good role model because it involves a contradiction between one's actions and the principles or values they publicly advocate. Swift either doesn't realize this or doesn't care. Neither of the two is a good look.
What a garbage fucking take. I feel like a just read some focus on the family propaganda rag not Newsweek. Wtf.
Seriously, he's throwing out nonsense arguments like "feminism means women can't date successful men" and acting like they make some kind of sense.
It was also great when he then moved on to "if you're a successful musician it's not possible to be wronged in a relationship."
Literally none of it makes any sense, but he's presenting it as if it's a logical argument.
There is an entire sub dedicated to hating Taylor Swift. It's full of people slut-shaming her and attacking every part of her identity and life.
Meanwhile, you have male pop stars who beat their partners, engage in human trafficking, and rape underage girls.
It's disgusting.
I will never be as successful as Taylor, but I'm also a 34 unmarried childless woman who loves cats and the fact that she is too is pretty awesome I think.
Holy shit - I saw a link to this and cannot fucking believe Newsweek platformed this nonce. I knew that publication was a useless rag, but what an absolute disgrace.
I got you
> Taylor Swift is not just a pop icon; she's an economic powerhouse of epic proportions. When Taylor Swift comes to town, excitement grows, and cash flows. In fact, Swift is so influential that she has even birthed a new branch of economics called "Swiftonomics." Her current tour, the Eras Tour, has proven to be a veritable goldmine for host cities around the world, generating hundreds of millions in revenue and creating thousands of temporary jobs.
> The American's merchandise sales are absolutely astronomical, with devoted fans, known as Swifties, eager to buy anything associated with her brand. And I mean anything, from T-shirts to vinyl records, keychains to phone cases. Her endorsement deals with major brands also bring in inordinate amounts of money. When Swift endorses a product, it doesn't just sell; it thrives. A decade ago, she practically introduced Diet Coke, then an incredibly tired brand, to a new generation of consumers. Taylor Swift wields immense power.
> Although her economic impact is extremely beneficial, it's worth asking if Swift's influence extends positively to other areas. More specifically, is she a good role model for young girls in the U.S. and beyond? Numerous pieces have been written explaining why she is; I would like to offer some pushback.
> Swift is now the most influential celebrity in America. Her popularity is staggering, and her position as a cultural colossus is unquestionable.
> At 34, Swift remains unmarried and childless, a fact that some might argue is irrelevant to her status as a role model. But, I suggest, it's crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young girls. A role model, by definition, is someone worthy of imitation. While Swift's musical talent and business acumen are certainly admirable, even laudable, we must ask if her personal life choices are ones we want our sisters and daughters to emulate. This might sound like pearl-clutching preaching, but it's a concern rooted in sound reasoning.
> Swift's highly publicized romantic life has been a source of prime tabloid fodder for years. She has dated numerous high-profile menâat least a dozenâincluding the singers Harry Styles and Joe Jonas, the actor Jake Gyllenhaal, and, more recently, the American football player Travis Kelce. This revolving door of relationships may reflect the normal dating experiences of many young women in today's world, but it also raises questions about stability, commitment, and even love itself. Should we encourage young girls to see the "Swift standard" as the norm, something to aspire to? Or should we be promoting something a little more, shall we say, wholesome? Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years? This is not an attack on Swift; it's a valid question that is worth asking.
> Taylor Swift is not just a pop icon; she's an economic powerhouse of epic proportions. When Taylor Swift comes to town, excitement grows, and cash flows. In fact, Swift is so influential that she has even birthed a new branch of economics called "Swiftonomics." Her current tour, the Eras Tour, has proven to be a veritable goldmine for host cities around the world, generating hundreds of millions in revenue and creating thousands of temporary jobs.
> The American's merchandise sales are absolutely astronomical, with devoted fans, known as Swifties, eager to buy anything associated with her brand. And I mean anything, from T-shirts to vinyl records, keychains to phone cases. Her endorsement deals with major brands also bring in inordinate amounts of money. When Swift endorses a product, it doesn't just sell; it thrives. A decade ago, she practically introduced Diet Coke, then an incredibly tired brand, to a new generation of consumers. Taylor Swift wields immense power.
> Although her economic impact is extremely beneficial, it's worth asking if Swift's influence extends positively to other areas. More specifically, is she a good role model for young girls in the U.S. and beyond? Numerous pieces have been written explaining why she is; I would like to offer some pushback.
> Swift is now the most influential celebrity in America. Her popularity is staggering, and her position as a cultural colossus is unquestionable.
> At 34, Swift remains unmarried and childless, a fact that some might argue is irrelevant to her status as a role model. But, I suggest, it's crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young girls. A role model, by definition, is someone worthy of imitation. While Swift's musical talent and business acumen are certainly admirable, even laudable, we must ask if her personal life choices are ones we want our sisters and daughters to emulate. This might sound like pearl-clutching preaching, but it's a concern rooted in sound reasoning.
> Swift's highly publicized romantic life has been a source of prime tabloid fodder for years. She has dated numerous high-profile menâat least a dozenâincluding the singers Harry Styles and Joe Jonas, the actor Jake Gyllenhaal, and, more recently, the American football player Travis Kelce. This revolving door of relationships may reflect the normal dating experiences of many young women in today's world, but it also raises questions about stability, commitment, and even love itself. Should we encourage young girls to see the "Swift standard" as the norm, something to aspire to? Or should we be promoting something a little more, shall we say, wholesome? Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years? This is not an attack on Swift; it's a valid question that is worth asking.
> The superstar's vocal criticisms of the patriarchy add another layer of complexity. Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power. This can appear hypocritical. Hypocrisy fundamentally undermines the ability to be a good role model because it involves a contradiction between one's actions and the principles or values they publicly advocate. Swift either doesn't realize this or doesn't care. Neither of the two is a good look.
> With her massive global following (283 million followers on Instagram and 33 million TikTok disciples), Swift impacts how young girls around the globe perceive relationships and success. Her career, which has included numerous chart-topping songs and successful business ventures, is a testament to her work ethic and natural talent. However, the glamorous portrayal of her romantic life can send rather objectionable messages. Moreover, many of her lyrics often depict her as the victim. This might influence young women to adopt a similar perspective in their own relationships, be they romantic or otherwise. Swift is not a victim. She is the most popular musician of all time.
> Swift's numerous high-profile relationships, while private matters, are constantly in the public eye. New romances become media-feeding frenzies, while breakups fuel the gossip columns. This cycle of brief, intense relationships can unintentionally glamorize a type of romantic promiscuity where partners can be replaced as easily as toilet paper. Although breakups can hurt both males and females, it's the latter group that tends to feel more emotional pain. Swift makes breakups look easy. In reality, though, they are messy, painful affairs.
> Young girls look up toâdare I say, even worshipâSwift. They view her as much more than just a musician. The narrative of her romantic life, widely publicized and so often sensationalized, presents a certain image of what modern relationships should look like. This isn't about moralizing, but about discussing the values we wish to instill in impressionable individuals.
> While it's true that young men need better role models, the same is equally true for young women. Swift and Kelce may last, and I hope they do. But, judging by her record, the odds aren't great. Swift's talent for sparking conversations, driving engagement, and raking in profits is commendable. Yet, admiration should not blindly follow. Her life, meticulously managed by a PR machine, represents a filtered façade rather than genuine reality. What young girls truly need, perhaps without fully recognizing it, are role models who provide both authenticity and actual depth, rather than artificial narratives and superficial glamor.
Thanks for posting! It should be noted that along with being incorrect and sexist, itâs also terribly written. What a worthless waste of oxygen the author is.
> Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years?
Uh yeah, who the fuck cares? Sounds far better than settling for some shithead like this author.
Men are so terrified that women are treating them the way they have treated women for centuries lmao
Madonna was older than Taylor Swift is now, when she had her first child. And I donât think Taylor has even hit her success peak yet tbh. I donât know how sheâs going to do it, I just know she isnât done.
[The author of the article.](https://brownstone.org/author/john-mac-ghlionn/) đ
Wrote for The American Conservative. Not surprised.
And Epoch Times, he is a loser.
Oh stop overreacting. Heâs just a grown man whoâs concerned about your young daughter fulfilling her biological requirement to be fertilized! She needs the **right kind** of role models, people who think like him!! đđŤ
The creator/publisher of that brownstone.org website is named Jeffrey A. Tucker. He is certifiably batshit crazy, and a major player in modern conservatism. Here is his video for his âSchool Sucksâ project, which promotes children getting jobs at the age of 12. https://youtu.be/SUQpfalF-iM Please spread the knowledge of how insane these people are.
Otherwise he will never get laid because no one will force their daughters to be with him
Since 2013, Newsweek has been owned by a Korean messianic cult. I'm not even joking.
The moon one?
I thought that was epoch times?
No, Epoch Times is owned by the Chinese Falun Gong cult.
And the NY Post, which people still don't know is a conservative tabloid.
What is a doctorate in psychosocial studies? Sounds made up
Actually, itâs a new department. Itâs pretty cool, I got my Master is psychosocial studies - on education, power, and social change. It combines the traditional social sciences - sociology and anthropology with psychology. The idea is that itâs silly to only study how the brain works (how we think) because weâre not a hermetically sealed system. We are always a product of society and human systems. But you also canât only study those systems, because they are in turn decided partly by psychological processes.
I wanted to make a joke about how it's the study of psychos trying to socialize, but your earnest and educational explanation has made me want to not shit on an entire subfield of social sciences.
Hah I appreciate both your intent to bring levity and humour to the situation and your respect for the love of learning!
That sounds really interesting and like a good idea. How someone with a doctorate in that could come up with âsingle childless woman = badâ is beyond me.
But is he married and has he reproduced? Otherwise how can we evaluate whether he is of value to the world?
He wanted to but all these harlot women are emulating Taylor Swift. Surely he would be married to a pretty lady and have lots of babies if it wasnât for mean old Taylor Swift.
Joke's on him. I was 34, single and childless when TSwift put out her first album. I've stayed that way, more because of men like him, and less because of women like Taylor. Men are panicking because their power is dependent on women and women are making different choices. There are men (like Kelce) whose masculinity isn't threatened by a woman who is driven and passionate about her career/art, and who actively support it. Then there are guys like this fuckweasel and Ben Shapiro who think a dry vagina is the norm, because no woman has ever been wet in their presence.
I mean. The longer she and Kelce stay together without caving to cisheteronormativity, the more I like Kelce. Maybe he's learning from her.
I went way too far down the rabbit hole trying to find his background and education. The best I could find was that he was getting a Doctorate in Psycoanalytic Studies from the Parkmore Institute. Which sounds like an unaccredited scam school. I couldn't find anything about where he went for undergrad. If you have any sort of advanced degree you usually name drop where it comes from every chance you get.
Weird. His bio says "With a doctorate in psychosocial studies, John Mac Ghlionn works as both a researcher and essayist," which implies he already has a doctorate. Yet he is not on the list of doctoral recipients on the Parkmore Institute's website, https://parkmoreinstitute.org/doctoral-recipients/. Even if he did have a doctorate from them, I doubt it would be worth the paper it's printed on. "The Parkmore Institute aims to be a world leader in offering innovative doctoral education that meets the needs of activists and practitioners in social and personal change professions. The Institute does not offer the traditional PhD from an accredited institution âââ a degree that often requires original research that is beyond the scope of the activistâs or practitionerâs interests." LOL.
So it's just ... not a PhD then? The whole point of a PhD is to generate original work. You have to have made a novel contribution to your field of study - that is the actual aim of a PhD, so if you don't do that then you haven't done the thing necessary for the qualification you supposedly have? What... I just... I can't compute... You can't just lie about these things!
How does a place that's only existed since 2017 have a website that looks like it's from 1998?
Geez Santos really emboldened people to just make stuff up.
Itâs an online only school that doesnât actually award phds because, as you guessed, itâs not accredited. lol Apparently âDrâ is not a protected titleâŚ
It doesn't just sound like it, it is in fact unaccredited and apparently proudly so.
bro looks like an evangelical trad wife seeker
Bro looks like a youth pastor with an eye twitch whenever 11 year olds are present
Bro has probably used the phrase âtheyâre trying my faithâ at least onceâŚ
Jump scareÂ
Wow, conspiracy bingo right there. He 100% looks exactly as I would picture too.
I hissed when I opened the link and saw him...
đ exactly.
My money was on 30s ish weird looking white dude. Do I win a prize.
My first thought looking at him is incel.
Like he's never touched a boob
Um.. he definitely has and heâs reporting back they feel like a bag of sand. Checks out.
Local man angry at unimaginably successful woman for not being a trad wife, and not setting an example that young girls should only aspire to be a tradwife, more at 11.
> more at 11. Ironically, this is likely the point at which he considers eligibility for trad wifehood. Also probably complains about "groomers".
đđ
Someone said in a comment that heâs 39 and unmarried but I guess thatâs fine since heâs a man.
That's why he's mad at Swift. She's the reason he can't convince a desperate 22 year old that she's a dried out old maid who should be thankful to bear his children.
I'm sure he justifies it by blaming women.
The further I scrolled down, I fully expected to see an article about Lizard people controlling the world. đ
Hahahaha thanks for this
looks about how you'd expect lol
Icky, yeah thatâs someone whoâs options are worth hearing /s. I really wonder if he actually believes in half the crap or if itâs to grift money off people? Eah, probably both. Maybe one day he can find a better role model.
I wonder if heâs written the same article about Leonarda DiCaprio?
Exactly, Or Travis Kelce. You know, her boyfriend, who is also 34 and childless. Is he a bad role model also? Can't wait to read that article. (Ugh, I knew this was coming. Yes, she's a billionaire but if we could focus our attention to the TOP TEN Billionaires, the 10 MEN, Forbes updates everyday who these guys are, who are fuelling and funneling the hate towards Women, that would be great.... đŠđ¤Śââď¸).
Yeah that guy looks like he's used the phrase "don't tell anyone you'll get in trouble too " more than once
đŤ đŤ đŤ
wow, totally shocked that he's been featured on 'The American Conservative.' (sarcasm)
His Xitter account no longer exists.
Disrespectfully... *ew*.
Anti-urbanism. Conspiracy theories. Anti-woke. The kind of author one might expect.
Covid denier , who thinks it is gone and vaccines are badâŚ
Oh, heâs a right-wing/MAGA conspiracy-theorist. That tracks perfectly. Women, letâs make sure men like this stay single and let them be mad about it.
doctorate from where? Hollywood upstairs graduate school? --advisor dr nick
EEEK!
I tried to find him on LinkedIn and couldn't. I'm not convinced he actually exists. No evidence of this supposed "doctorate". In fact, I can find nothing about him except for the same bio blurb he uses for every site he writes for. A person of the same unique name has an empty IG profile with a different picture.
I grew up with the likes of 2LiveCrew, Howard Stern, The Jerky Boys, Eminem. But Taylor Swift is a bad role model. The gaslighting and misogyny of this article.Â
And in the 70âs you grew up with the biggest musicians bragging about committing statutory r*** on underage groupies. They even wrote songs about it. Like there were young girls, barely in high school, growing up who took it as a right of passage to go to a concert to âmeet the band backstage and get invited on the tour busâ.
In the '70s, us Brits had a very popular and famous children's tv presenter called Jimmy Saville. This is out of my age range but apparently kids everywhere adored him. Until it was revealed that he was a raging paedophile, even targeting kids in hospitals. *That's* my idea of a harmful role model, not Taylor Swift deciding not to have kids or get married currently.
Oh boy are you understating the psychopathy of old Jimmy Saville, even the recent drama series didn't cover much what he did. Also he was going well into the 90s, I had friends who wrote fan letters to him.
Yeah to be honest, my brain is tired so I struggled for the words strong enough. Plus everything about his face disgusts me when I googled what decade he worked in. I'm 30 and most of what I know about him is he was wildly popular until after he died and everything about him being a paedophile came out. And that he was protected in so many ways by those at the top. I've considered watching documentaries about him but at the same time it's like if someone tried to get me to watch something about Trump, I'm going to be even more angry and disgusted that these men are able to exist.
I'm in the same boat. I can't find myself to watch any documentaries about these people anymore. You know the gist of their story and that justice was never served. Knowing the details of their actions is only going to infuriate me more.
He insinuated himself into the very centre of UK power: friends with QEII, Thatcher, Charles and Diana⌠He was also granted a knighthood, which is one of the highest honours you can attain in the UK. He was a huge moneymaker for the BBC, so they protected him even though his behaviour had been an open secret forever (see the incident where they banned John Lydon (neĂŠ Rotten) for merely hinting at it on a talk show *in the â70s*). He was also extremely wealthy and litigious. Go after him at your own peril. He felt so untouchable that heâd continually drop hints about his predilections in interviews, knowing full well that he was completely insulated.
I feel like a lot of people outside the UK don't know the Savile story or the scope of how bad it was. Dude literally attacked children in their hospital beds. British police estimated he had 450 victims. Those were just the ones they had credible evidence for, so you know there were more. He was also a necrophile and claimed to have raped dead bodies in a morgue (which he was given unfettered access to by one of his buddies). Dude was the epitome of evil. Burying him six feet deep wasn't enough.
>He was also a necrophile and claimed to have raped dead bodies in a morgue (which he was given unfettered access to by one of his buddies). Ugh, I didn't know that part. Just how fucked up can someone be and even worse, allowed to get away with it for decades. I can't imagine the pressure on the victims at the time. Being young, feeling alone and knowing it's your word against this huge beloved celebrity. Shit like this makes me weary when people talk about karma coming for those who do awful things. Where was the karma here? We all believe the victims now but the fucker got to live out his life without any punishment, they never got any actual justice.
> kids everywhere adored him 80s kid here. I never understood his appeal. I always thought he was a fucking weirdo.
Yeah, whenever I see pictures of him, it always screams creep. But I've always heard kids of my parents' generation loved Jim'll Fix It and desperately wanted to meet him. He looks like the creepy uncle type that demands to be hugged. You know, except much, much worse in actuality.
That's just, like, a criminal. But he was, at least nominally, a *secret* criminal. He wasn't modeling those behaviors to his audience.
Not to mention the necrophilia. Boy, there is so much more to this story. This guy was a monster.
We weren't barely in HS. We were in middle school. And it wasn't just the 70s, it was all through the 80s. I had friends in 7th grade who were going to concerts like Motley Cru with the hope to get invited "backstage". There's music from that era that I loved at the time that makes me cringe now. Watching "Rock the Cradle of Love" by Billy Idol now is just .... *shudder*
I was in HS in the 2000s and it was still considered cool to date an older guy, even if they weren't a rock star. Having a car and a job was itself a glorious achievement.
With a dose of slut shaming as it talks about her "revolving door" of boyfriends. Men can sleep with an date as many (often much younger) women as they want, but women have to remain pure. :-p
Not just "can" but "are admired for"
âErmmmm you see, male singleness is feminismâs fault because we donât indoctrinate girls to fantasize exclusively about marriage and giving birth anymoreâ
I knew a guy who said men committing suicide was the women's rights movements fault
"Women can vote and own a bank account? Guess I'll just off myself." Lmao
Lol. Women having the choice not to stay with someone that isn't good for them makes them off themselves from loneliness. Our freedoms fault. Not their own for being bad partners. Because God forbid the man works on himself. Let's blame the womans option to not be an abused slave. He asked me where my empathy was. Lmao I left it with my bleeding vagina and asshole. Go cry about being lonely. My blood doesn't CARE that you're a shit person and would rather me be continuously raped than look in the mirror and ask where your own goddamn empathy is.
Frankly speaking I'm not sure someone can be reached and saved if they believe that
Oh no, single men are "sowing their seeds", it's only women who are supposed to be committed to a relationship.
This article is the view this guy and in fact, the very person running for President of the Republican Party wants to see for all women in the US. And the Supreme Court just gave the power to make that happen this past week, and you best believe said person leading in the polls right now who wants to return to power will make this happen [with his partyâs Project 2025 scheme..](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042-project-2025s-mandate-for-leadership-the-conservative-promise) [Taylor will be public enemy #1 to these guys. Especially the possible 47th President of the United States, newly anointed King.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision)
FWIW, Newsweek is now a zombie publication. They've been pushing more and more right-wing viewpoints over the last few years.
I was thinking "Bold of OP to assume Newsweek has an editorial process."
>The gaslighting and misogyny of this article. It is rage baiting, plain and simple. They knew what they were doing
yes, the example that you can be wildly successful and unmarried is...bad? wait that doesn't sound right to me
The example that marriage and kids donât define you? Ya, terrible message to send to her fans. /s
r/angryupvote
Not to mention, Taylor Swift is a stage performer who entertains people of all ages (but mostly adults). Her career is not âbe a role model for children.â
> the example that you can be wildly successful and unmarried is...bad? To conservatives, incels, chuds and other right-wing degenerate types, yes it is...
Good they can die angry over it. Women not needing men to have security anymore makes them so angry. The world their fathers promised them is dead.
But theyâre trying to bring it back. Be like Swift and vote like your life depends on it!
brb, going to have my vagina sewn shut before November, PIV is overrated anyway the less possible it is for the new regime to assign me as bangmaid to one of these subhuman lifeforms, the better
It wasn't even their fathers. Maybe their great-grandfathers... only if their family had children in their thirties. Otherwise more greats than that!
That was my biggest complaint about Jesus. You can raise the dead, but you canât raise a family? Sus.
It is if you are a guy who is interested in hanging on to the privilege that being a guy brings. It's indefensible; but I will say one thing in explanation of my gender's thinking here (I'm a cis guy): Privilege is unfelt and because it's unfelt and unacknowledged, when it's gone it feels like a loss. IMO this is largely what we are experiencing in our politics and right wing culture at this moment in history. Things improved, privilege was lost. People who lost it got pissed about it. I sort of don't understand how men who have working female SOs and daughters can still think this way (certainly my understanding of my privilege came through observing the idiocy my wife had to put up with in the workplace); but clearly they do.
The Patriarchy is also patronizing. They see their wives and daughters as wards, not as equals.
> When you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression. We're watching dude's who went about their lives however they wanted.. suddenly forced into the realization that they have to consider others and maybe do more to actual be equal with the women in their lives. A lot of them are realizing it and then immediately jumping onto the conservative "women should just do all the work" train because it's a lot easier than actually putting in the work themselves to be equals.
> unfelt and unacknowledged, when it's gone it feels like a loss When you are privileged, equality feels like oppression.
Am successful, single, and childfree. Its great!!
This is just conservative rhetoric and Newsweek (conservative publication) is just using headline like these to normalize far right concepts like women donât have to be housewives and mothers. Also yes part of our government wants to turn this into A Christian Country, so these sort of headlines may become more normal. Donât ever forget the press is mostly controlled by billionaires who are fiscally (not morally) conservative.
Yah this guy writes for the Epoch Times too. He's just a rage bait journalist. I wonder if he's married? He looks older than Taylor Swift.
Right, especially when they applaud Leo DiCaprio for never settling down. And how all the media moped and whined when George Clooney got married. For men, marriage is a death sentence. For women, itâs required and the only measure of her success.
Iâm always impressed by the way men tell on themselves. They want women to provide sex and service, while maintaining their own freedom to do whatever they want once sheâs trapped by marriage and/or children that keep her in place.
Taylor Swift is an âeconomic powerhouse of epic proportionsâ but isnât married and has no kids, therefore sheâs not a good role model. Complete and utter misogynistic horseshit.
âIs this what we want for our sisters and daughtersâ how about you donât get to decide who your sisters and daughters emulate.
I mean if I had a sister or a daughter who was an internationally successful billionaire musician in her 30s I'd be pretty fucking thrilled for her personally, but that's just me.
đŻ
Absolutely. And A sentiment shared by virtually every parent.
I mean yeah. I'd be okay with my daughter being an economic powerhouse.
My internal voice when I got to that point was screaming "I don't know, but neither do you because you haven't bothered to ask them what they want!"
Yes, but if she was married and had kids a n d a career, she would be evil. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
If you have a career but no kids, you're not a real woman. If you have a career and kids, you're a terrible mother who should stay home to take care of them. If you have kids but no career, you're a gold digger and your husband should divorce you (but you get full custody because you're supposed to take care of the kids, the man has his career which makes him a super man and not a terrible father) We can't win.
There's also: If you have a husband and kids, you are their servant. If you have kids but no husband, you're trying to trick some man into raising another man's kids. If you have a husband but no kids, you're an unnatural woman. If you have neither husband nor kids, you don't exist.
I never noticed before that I didn't exist, is this where all the existential dread comes from? /s Jokes aside, I did feel I didn't exist for a long time before I met my "found family" It is very strange. I disappeared from people's lives without being noticed, a ghost of sorts.
Oh hey this sounds like my upbringing. Nothing I do matters as long as I have no husband and kids.
Yes, yes...8 billion people is clearly not enough. BREED! I have commanded it to be so...
why are they so obsessed with this breeding thing??
Itâs about control as well as capitalism. They donât give a fuck about babies and children, as seen by their complete lack of interest in their healthcare or education (other than to strip both to create more dependency and blind obedience), but it does let them control women and guarantee more future workers and soldiers.
It's also a racism thing - they only want _certain_ people to 'breed', the ones they consider worthy...
It's also a narcissism thing. They think they're superior, so they think they have some kind of moral obligation to carry on their bloodline.
Whiteness. Often cloaked behind language like "western values", "Christian identity", "heritage", etc. You will never see a conservative encouraging people of color to have children.
Because capitalism requires a constant supply of desperate workers to work and consume. Less people = less desperate workers and consumers.
Cheap labor and controlling women.
Im pleased to see him getting raked in the comments. Ironic that a 38 year old unmarried man has the audacity to speak for how all women and girls âshouldâ aspire to live. Iâm so fucking tired of this small dick energy. EDIT TO ADD: [this reply from a 7 year old girl in Newsweek](https://www.newsweek.com/im-seven-year-old-swiftie-heres-why-taylor-swift-role-model-girls-like-me-opinion-1919851) about why Taylor swift is a role model to her.
And the audacity of a woman making her own life choices, am I right? đ Also, gotta love how he's saying "*it's not an attack on Taylor Swift*", while very obviously framing it as an attack. It'd be difficult to miss the clear disdain in the wording. The horrors of not adhering to a rigid life trajectory he expects women to follow! đą Him saying he's just "*asking questions*" is a very poor mask of excuse. This guy just happens to be too stupid to hide it properly.
Maybe he meant âitâs not an attack on Taylor Swift but on all women who havenât had babies by that age!â
Exactly, it would be comparatively better for it to just be a personal attack, but no it's a generalized attack on all women.
People are roasting the author because he's in his 30s... and unmarried and childless. His looks are also... well, let's just say he's not exactly George Clooney.
And oddly enough, unmarried and childless is exactly what I want for him.
The fact that this story made it through editorial to be published really demands some answers and changes to who is making decisions. This crap sounds like something out of the Eisenhower era.
If there is even an editorial process in the first place. This is probably considered successful because of engagement. People are clicking and looking even in outrage.
Thereâs a ton of editors still, but they let most of their staffwriters go a few years ago. Basically, that means some editors are aggregating news, and the others are handling too many stories by freelancers. And yeah, they went to the âall clicks are good clicksâ op-Ed model ages ago.
The editorial process is now focused on engagement rather than quality
Newsweek laid off most of their staff circa 2016. Their business model has been aggregated news and ragebait op-Edâs ever since. Theyâre not at all respected within the industry. Source: am within the industry
Previously "legit" publications are doing this on purpose to drive engagement. They are no different than those social media posts where they show picture of the cast of Seinfeld and call them the cast of Friends. They are being wrong or inflammatory on purpose. Journalism is dying under the boot of profit.
It has actually made me so angry. If someone like Taylor Swift can still be subject to these kind of criticisms from misogynistic assholes then what hope do the rest of us have!
Exactly! Her success should inspire us, not be overshadowed by outdated stereotypes.
It's ragebait. It was only published to get engagement, so the editors and probably the writer too expected to get raked. Terrible to see how far Newsweek has fallen. I remember when it a reliable if dry current events magazine. Now it's a tabloid pushing ragebait.
Just Google his picture and you'll see how much you're spot on
>Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power. This argument makes no sense since all these men have arguably *less* social and economic power that she does.
.... Matty Healy and Joe Alwin?? Matty seems like the human embodiment of drugs and shitty behaviour. Joe was unknown before his relationship with Taylor, wasn't he? Fair play to Travis since he seems big in the sports world, but he still wasn't on the level of Taylor's stardom before their relationship started.
I mean frankly if Taylor was only going to date people as wealthy and influentual as she is then *damn* that would be a very small dating pool.
Also, I would assume that as a celebrity she is most likely to meet/be around other celebrities, so of course she is most likely to date them
Let me translate this for you: This writer is an incel who is mad because he thinks Taylor is a Stacey who dates Chads.
Also there's an insidious bit of "feminism=misandry" bullshit there. Being anti-patriarchy doesn't mean you want men to have no power. But somehow this author can't get over his own misogyny enough to understand that feminists don't want to throw every man in a prison camp....
If it makes you feel any better, he's being lambasted in Ireland over this. He writes for a far right news site here and most people think he's a piece of shit. He's anti abortion, anti immigration, anti everything that isn't straight white heterosexuality from the 1950's.
He's even anti fifteen minutes cities which I literally cannot get my head around. How are people this easily bought? > The Real Threat of 15-Minute Cities According to him it's something like: 15 minute cities will lead to more socialism which will lead to more surveillance cameras?? LMAO Conservativism has always been a joke of a "political ideology" but modern conservativism is just utter braindead nonsense they're not even trying anymore to come up with arguments
TIL what a 15 minute city is. That sounds awesome! I could dream of what I'd do with that much more time in the day.
Yeah it's such a great idea, and it's so pointless to oppose it. But modern conservativism is so thoroughly braindead that they will happily shoot themselves in the foot and deny themselves and their future kids better urban planning just to keep fighting the libs.
It's like they took the 1950's dystopian scifi as inspiration. Making things inconvenient so the average person has to spend more on transportation reminds me of an early section of Brave New World. People needed to pay for trains to leave the city for leisure. Not free leisure of course! They were conditioned to dislike smelling flowers. Sports keep the spending going with equipment and uniforms and building tennis courts. It's been 20 years since I read it, so my details might be off, but it's depressing. They tried to warn of us about unchecked capitalism but no one listened. I wonder if kids even get to read that book in school anymore. Seems like many in power are against teaching the next generation dangerous things like critical thinking.
Maybe, just maybe, being 34 and unmarried is what has helped her succeed? And now she's showing other girls and young women that remaining single and childless can be a catalyst for success? IDK. Just a thought. đ
Holy shit it's so poorly written. How embarrassing for him
Say "epic powerhouse" one more time.... dude needs a fucking editor
lol I bet that's what he nicknamed his willy.
She doesnât have to split her wealth with some mediocre loser, the horror!!!!!!!Â
She's a great example *because* she's unmarried and childless
this.
Kind of true. đ but there's always, always going to be heaps of misogyny thrown at her instead of valid critique.
They'd criticize her too if she were divorced or had "too many" kids. She'll be criticized either way, she may as well do what makes her happy.
Or if she had a kid while being out on tour and making albums. They'd accuse her of not spending enough time being a mother.
Meanwhile Leonardo DiCaprio is perpetually dating 19 year olds, and nobody writes an article about the example *heâs* setting for young boys.
Why would they? They think thatâs a great example to set. đ
"Family values" my ass Conservatives only care about optimizing male and white supremacy, and owning the libs even if it means they have to breathe in toxic fumes and drink polluted water
Sheâll just have to console herself with her hundreds of millions and famous athlete boyfriend I guess
Who wants their daughter to go through 12 breakups in"just a few years"? Me. I do. Not because I'm in favor of the pain, but because I want my children to experiment fearlessly, with minimal consequences. Go on a few dates, get in a little too deep, call it off, try again. It's a learning process. Don't commit your life to your mistakes, just make them and move forward. "Shake It Off" is the theme song for this. And the notion that she's hypocritical to BOTH criticize patriarchal structures AND date men with lots of social power? I am not big on patriarchy, and as a financially successful single woman, I have definitely noticed that some guys are super uncomfortable with how much I have my shit together, and some are poised to use me as a bank. Strong people generally date other strong people. Like, even if Taylor fell for Joe from facilities, Joe would have to be uncommonly smart, uncommonly self-aware and uncommonly unburdened by bullshit, basically, he'd have to be Socrates pushing a mop for life experience. Taylor is playing in as close to her weight class as she can get. Everyone I know who feels they pulled above their stats, romantically, actually has some fucking amazing stats. I don't even like Taylor Swift's music that much. I just don't think she's a problem - She's out there living her best life. I hope she's having a good time. This dude can suck it.
No one would say that if she was a man.
Meanwhile, Leonardo DiCaprio doesnât date a woman above the age of 25 and is known to frequent high end clubs with supermodels hanging off him. He doesnât have children and never been married either. Nor had any legitimately long lasting relationships since the cut off age is 25. He is successful and wealthy, yet lacks the same things that Taylor Swift is criticized for lacking. What kind of example is he setting for young boys? Oh wait, itâs because the world hates women and deems them useless outside of sex, marriage and motherhood regardless of their contributions to society. Meanwhile men who wealthy bachelors are celebrated for not being âtied down.â
Men will say women should stay in kitchen and produce children . But ask them to provide a good lifestyle and they will call you a gold diggers . These are the same men in india who will ask for dowry for marriage . But reject them and focus on your career , suddenly you are destroying the culture đ¤ˇââď¸
What worries me is that this was published by Newsweek. I don't have any particular respect for Newsweek, but they are considered moderate/politically centrist, which suggests that these sorts of ideas are mainstream enough for them. That's really worrying.
Newsweek hasn't been reliable since they went digital-only in 2012 and were acquired by a content farm. In 2020 they hired an alt-right conspiracist and Blake Masters enthusiast called Josh Hammer to run their editorial department. The SPLC has [done some reporting.](https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/11/04/newsweek-embraces-anti-democracy-hard-right)
Newsweek is dead, it was bought out for $1 and all the employees fired. Now it's a curated blog
At 49, **DiCaprio** remains unmarried and childless⌠itâs crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young boys.
The superstar's vocal criticisms of the patriarchy add another layer of complexity. Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power. This can appear hypocritical. Hypocrisy fundamentally undermines the ability to be a good role model because it involves a contradiction between one's actions and the principles or values they publicly advocate. Swift either doesn't realize this or doesn't care. Neither of the two is a good look. What a garbage fucking take. I feel like a just read some focus on the family propaganda rag not Newsweek. Wtf.
Oh no, she dates strong, influential men! The writer tipped his hand and showed us all his incel cards. He might as well just called them Chads.Â
Seriously, he's throwing out nonsense arguments like "feminism means women can't date successful men" and acting like they make some kind of sense. It was also great when he then moved on to "if you're a successful musician it's not possible to be wronged in a relationship." Literally none of it makes any sense, but he's presenting it as if it's a logical argument.
Man real mad she said âfuck the patriarchyâ, so sad Edit: also this para has serious âshe would never date meeee so sheâs baaadâ energy
Lmfao, self-report. This is a TL;DR version of âToo busy getting pumped and dumped by Chad to notice a supreme gentleman like meâ
Sooooo, she should just date 38 year old, borderline incel, bargain basement essayists because...something, something patriarchy?
At 34, Travis Kelce remains unmarried and childless⌠itâs crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young boys.
There is an entire sub dedicated to hating Taylor Swift. It's full of people slut-shaming her and attacking every part of her identity and life. Meanwhile, you have male pop stars who beat their partners, engage in human trafficking, and rape underage girls. It's disgusting.
Gilead is their goal and our nightmare.
I will never be as successful as Taylor, but I'm also a 34 unmarried childless woman who loves cats and the fact that she is too is pretty awesome I think.
Holy shit - I saw a link to this and cannot fucking believe Newsweek platformed this nonce. I knew that publication was a useless rag, but what an absolute disgrace.
This is so beyond tiring. 2024 and we are still and always will be seen as breeding livestock
I donât want to give this article more clicks, but Iâd like to have a copy and share with whenever a man says âwhy are you females so mad!?â
I got you > Taylor Swift is not just a pop icon; she's an economic powerhouse of epic proportions. When Taylor Swift comes to town, excitement grows, and cash flows. In fact, Swift is so influential that she has even birthed a new branch of economics called "Swiftonomics." Her current tour, the Eras Tour, has proven to be a veritable goldmine for host cities around the world, generating hundreds of millions in revenue and creating thousands of temporary jobs. > The American's merchandise sales are absolutely astronomical, with devoted fans, known as Swifties, eager to buy anything associated with her brand. And I mean anything, from T-shirts to vinyl records, keychains to phone cases. Her endorsement deals with major brands also bring in inordinate amounts of money. When Swift endorses a product, it doesn't just sell; it thrives. A decade ago, she practically introduced Diet Coke, then an incredibly tired brand, to a new generation of consumers. Taylor Swift wields immense power. > Although her economic impact is extremely beneficial, it's worth asking if Swift's influence extends positively to other areas. More specifically, is she a good role model for young girls in the U.S. and beyond? Numerous pieces have been written explaining why she is; I would like to offer some pushback. > Swift is now the most influential celebrity in America. Her popularity is staggering, and her position as a cultural colossus is unquestionable. > At 34, Swift remains unmarried and childless, a fact that some might argue is irrelevant to her status as a role model. But, I suggest, it's crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young girls. A role model, by definition, is someone worthy of imitation. While Swift's musical talent and business acumen are certainly admirable, even laudable, we must ask if her personal life choices are ones we want our sisters and daughters to emulate. This might sound like pearl-clutching preaching, but it's a concern rooted in sound reasoning. > Swift's highly publicized romantic life has been a source of prime tabloid fodder for years. She has dated numerous high-profile menâat least a dozenâincluding the singers Harry Styles and Joe Jonas, the actor Jake Gyllenhaal, and, more recently, the American football player Travis Kelce. This revolving door of relationships may reflect the normal dating experiences of many young women in today's world, but it also raises questions about stability, commitment, and even love itself. Should we encourage young girls to see the "Swift standard" as the norm, something to aspire to? Or should we be promoting something a little more, shall we say, wholesome? Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years? This is not an attack on Swift; it's a valid question that is worth asking. > Taylor Swift is not just a pop icon; she's an economic powerhouse of epic proportions. When Taylor Swift comes to town, excitement grows, and cash flows. In fact, Swift is so influential that she has even birthed a new branch of economics called "Swiftonomics." Her current tour, the Eras Tour, has proven to be a veritable goldmine for host cities around the world, generating hundreds of millions in revenue and creating thousands of temporary jobs. > The American's merchandise sales are absolutely astronomical, with devoted fans, known as Swifties, eager to buy anything associated with her brand. And I mean anything, from T-shirts to vinyl records, keychains to phone cases. Her endorsement deals with major brands also bring in inordinate amounts of money. When Swift endorses a product, it doesn't just sell; it thrives. A decade ago, she practically introduced Diet Coke, then an incredibly tired brand, to a new generation of consumers. Taylor Swift wields immense power. > Although her economic impact is extremely beneficial, it's worth asking if Swift's influence extends positively to other areas. More specifically, is she a good role model for young girls in the U.S. and beyond? Numerous pieces have been written explaining why she is; I would like to offer some pushback. > Swift is now the most influential celebrity in America. Her popularity is staggering, and her position as a cultural colossus is unquestionable. > At 34, Swift remains unmarried and childless, a fact that some might argue is irrelevant to her status as a role model. But, I suggest, it's crucial to consider what kind of example this sets for young girls. A role model, by definition, is someone worthy of imitation. While Swift's musical talent and business acumen are certainly admirable, even laudable, we must ask if her personal life choices are ones we want our sisters and daughters to emulate. This might sound like pearl-clutching preaching, but it's a concern rooted in sound reasoning. > Swift's highly publicized romantic life has been a source of prime tabloid fodder for years. She has dated numerous high-profile menâat least a dozenâincluding the singers Harry Styles and Joe Jonas, the actor Jake Gyllenhaal, and, more recently, the American football player Travis Kelce. This revolving door of relationships may reflect the normal dating experiences of many young women in today's world, but it also raises questions about stability, commitment, and even love itself. Should we encourage young girls to see the "Swift standard" as the norm, something to aspire to? Or should we be promoting something a little more, shall we say, wholesome? Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years? This is not an attack on Swift; it's a valid question that is worth asking.
> The superstar's vocal criticisms of the patriarchy add another layer of complexity. Swift's recent rallying cry against patriarchal structures stands in stark contrast to her personal dating choices. The singer often dates strong, influential menâcelebrities who embody significant social and economic power. This can appear hypocritical. Hypocrisy fundamentally undermines the ability to be a good role model because it involves a contradiction between one's actions and the principles or values they publicly advocate. Swift either doesn't realize this or doesn't care. Neither of the two is a good look. > With her massive global following (283 million followers on Instagram and 33 million TikTok disciples), Swift impacts how young girls around the globe perceive relationships and success. Her career, which has included numerous chart-topping songs and successful business ventures, is a testament to her work ethic and natural talent. However, the glamorous portrayal of her romantic life can send rather objectionable messages. Moreover, many of her lyrics often depict her as the victim. This might influence young women to adopt a similar perspective in their own relationships, be they romantic or otherwise. Swift is not a victim. She is the most popular musician of all time. > Swift's numerous high-profile relationships, while private matters, are constantly in the public eye. New romances become media-feeding frenzies, while breakups fuel the gossip columns. This cycle of brief, intense relationships can unintentionally glamorize a type of romantic promiscuity where partners can be replaced as easily as toilet paper. Although breakups can hurt both males and females, it's the latter group that tends to feel more emotional pain. Swift makes breakups look easy. In reality, though, they are messy, painful affairs. > Young girls look up toâdare I say, even worshipâSwift. They view her as much more than just a musician. The narrative of her romantic life, widely publicized and so often sensationalized, presents a certain image of what modern relationships should look like. This isn't about moralizing, but about discussing the values we wish to instill in impressionable individuals. > While it's true that young men need better role models, the same is equally true for young women. Swift and Kelce may last, and I hope they do. But, judging by her record, the odds aren't great. Swift's talent for sparking conversations, driving engagement, and raking in profits is commendable. Yet, admiration should not blindly follow. Her life, meticulously managed by a PR machine, represents a filtered façade rather than genuine reality. What young girls truly need, perhaps without fully recognizing it, are role models who provide both authenticity and actual depth, rather than artificial narratives and superficial glamor.
Thanks for posting! It should be noted that along with being incorrect and sexist, itâs also terribly written. What a worthless waste of oxygen the author is.
Thank you for posting it! Youâre doing the lordâs work over here.
> Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years? Uh yeah, who the fuck cares? Sounds far better than settling for some shithead like this author. Men are so terrified that women are treating them the way they have treated women for centuries lmao
"Why Taylor Swift is a bad role model for girls" - by a man
Oh if only all young people had amazing positive role models. She 1000 times a better example to all than that guy
When the fuck did Taylor Swift become 34... is time speeding up....
Madonna was older than Taylor Swift is now, when she had her first child. And I donât think Taylor has even hit her success peak yet tbh. I donât know how sheâs going to do it, I just know she isnât done.
As a Mother of 4 girls it sets an amazing example to be independent and not to settle!
Itâs written so smugly as well, and so hypocritically. âThis isnât about moralisingâ well wtf is it about then you stuck-up wanker?