Valerie

​donald  trump moves to #1 on the list of most despised person alive

 

but I would suggest this thread be moved to the members only part that people looking in can't read.

​

Hold on,donald trump #1?

so tonz of murderers,rapists,pedophiles,terrorists,anything to hate the most are not #1 yet Trump is?

wow this world has no hope

you guys jump to insult me and some of you in fact disrespected peep's family. How do you "know" that nobody helped him? You don't know his family and the people close to him. You just don't know which people tried to help him.
There is no way he didn't get help.His mother did try to help him,she was super close and loved him.Obviously we don't know which people or the number of people but the one FACT is that at least one person (his mother) did offer him help, we just don't know which other people helped too. It's insulting to even try to say that nobody helped him.You all yap about me "disrespecting" him, yet you don't realize that you disrespect every person that tried to help him including his mother with insisting that "nobody helped him". Interesting how that works.

Anyways, I'm done with this topic so save your quotes.

I wonder how his crazy ex gf too poor feels

So you can call people affected by this crazy but I can't call him an idiot?

mod note - user has been warned for above posts in this thread

while @Valerie is hardcore heartless, yet don't make Peep a victim lmao, he wanted this lifestyle, he played and lost. Mental issues are a thing but it does not excuse any type of stupid behavior (towards others or oneself). Glorification of heavy drugs and overall public validation he recieved for obvious self-destructive behavior truly must be something ppl must think about though. How could he even question right his lifestyle when it's what made him famous ?

I see no difference between what I posted in comparison to your post, so we can be heartless together then! No problem there! Hopefully sparklegingerinbred learns the real definition of respect soon before he tries to lecture me tho.

the fact people treat drug users as sub-human and not worthy of respect truly shows that people don't really give a shit about people sometimes. substance abuse is a massive issue and is related to other taboo or stigmatized problems like classism and mental illness which are hard things to overcome, combining two of those issues makes for a hellish mix and lil peep unfortunately displayed that. drug users deserve compassion, don't be an asshole

What the fuck do you know about respect btw? Your response to a video of someone speaking about how people who have sacrificed themselves for your ginger inbred ass to have freedom over hundreds of years was a burnt flag. Throw yourself in that fire next time fire crotch, you can join lil peephole xxx

the fact people treat drug users as sub-human and not worthy of respect truly shows that people don't really give a shit about people sometimes. substance abuse is a massive issue and is related to other taboo or stigmatized problems like classism and mental illness which are hard things to overcome, combining two of those issues makes for a hellish mix and lil peep unfortunately displayed that. drug users deserve compassion, don't be an asshole

Nothing taboo about drug usage when the abuse is up almost 9% in the U.S since 2002, not to mention it is one of the most sympathized causes of death. People are treated as heroes when they die of addiction more so than when they die of cancer which is fucking tragic. What brings people back is the "mystery" behind it, don't deny it. It compels more people in comparison to "expected" deaths such as cancer.  He had more money than most kids do at his tender age and he chose to shit it all down the drain on drugs and bitch about it in his music rather than getting actual help. Music can only help so much, just ask Lana. You want help? Look for it, you can't expect the world to come to you. The problem with you all is you're too entitled and products of a pussy silver spoon generation. You think you're so special that people should be flocking to your door to help you. The world doesn't work that way. None of you know if someone tried to help him, and if he's as close to his mother as you all claim, then you can bet she tried. And tried. And tried. And tried. It's an endless cycle with many junkies, and they hurt so many people along the way. And they don't give a fuck about it either.

Peep was also very clearly depressed and in an awful state of mind, that combined with being in an entourage of enablers and addicts can have disastrous results. He was posting cries for help on Instagram and no one around him had the insight to get him help, and that's why he is dead today. People are so quick to demonize addicts and I admit it can be easy to do so but things aren't so black and white. Even if he wanted to get clean, I doubt he could while living the lifestyle he had

"Being in an entourage of enablers" yes like you. You keep making up excuses for him. "No one around him had the insight to get him help" how the hell would you know? You don't know what people have tried to do. First I have people telling me that he knew he needed help but didn't seek for it, now you're telling me that no one told him to get help. How are you getting this info exactly? So his mom he was super close to (as stated by people in this thread) just let her kid go without saying anything? If what you are telling me is true and you have evidence of not ONE person ever telling him to get help or trying to help him, then yes, his mom is an idiot too. Ultimately though it is lil peepah's move. You can only help yourself, others can only do so much. You are a part of the "entourage of an enablers", make no mistake of that. Look at the way you excuse his usage. Yet you say you care? You don't give a fuck. You just pretend to.

Btw you basically implied through some of this he was a waste of life meaning did he deserve to live anyway?last thing I'll say on the subject

don't try to get it twisted sweetie. I want you to quote me with the exact sentence where i said "he deserved to die". Im waiting. What is this crap? "you implieeeeed" where did i imply that? Maybe u are seeing what u want to see, must be repressed thoughts on lil peep. Food for thought.

"last thing i will say on the subject" yes, because you know u are wrong.

I used was hinting previously and did it in a sarcastic way I'm sure however she probably was close to the brink of death a few times unfortunately peep didn't have the same support system.

Lana has an amazing family and

peep is/was surrounded by other abusers

you still haven't showed me the post where i said he deserved to die.

and he actually has a support system honey, he KNEW he had "mental problems" as he claimed and what did he do? he used the money for his 'rising rap career' instead of getting help.there is even free youth centers he could go to. he had support and his family, his own mother was close to him, and money as well.

Lots of addicts have amazing families, supporting people around them, but they still waste themselves.supporting environment does help to some degree, but in the end it's them that can only truly help themselves. Peeper chose to surround himself with shit people and didn't regard anything and anyone close to him.

Also while we're on the subject Lana was a drug addict for how long and all of us on this site stan for her was she an unfeeling piece of shit too?

Lana is sober sweetie and guess what!Shes sober bc she respects herself, she respects her own life and her family. How exactly is lana a drug addict and unfeeling piece of shit?

Usually people with addiction can't see the hurt they're doing to their loved ones. And he didn't waste his life, he was a rising rapper for Christ sake.

But his life barely begun. He was only 21. rising rapper lol. He barely did anything, what "rising rapper"?? He was only 21. He should get help if he had "problems" and not drug himself to death and bringing pain to his family and friends.

Eugh disgusting that some of you would try to speak ill of the dead even people on atrl had more respect than some of you on here yes drugs are bad but there's no need to say someone deserves to die or whatever

learn how to read better honey. When did i say "he deserved to die"? quote which post of mine says that. I will wait okay?

So now we know who the heartless bitch is here. Praying for your mind

my mind is fine thankfully. you should pray for yours. The heartless one is Lil Peepah for not giving a fuck for anyone else but himself and drugs.

 

Do you know how depression works?

yes sweetie i do know. one depression symptom can be = not giving a fuck.Im sure you know that too

I won’t insult you by calling you an unsympathetic piece of sh*t but i will say this - addiction is not so cut and dry. He was very vocal about having mental health issues and even said it was getting worse and worse as he was on tour. Everyone has different coping mechanisms and that’s the only way he knew how to cope.

I don't care if you insult me. I didn't insult you though so go ahead. Him saying that he has mental health issues doesn't make him any less of an idiot. And just bc someone claims to have mental problems doesn't mean they do. Usually it's just this pussy generation being a bunch of melodramatic queens.

Okay let me say this to all those who are calling him all kinds of obscenities:

 

This guys was a PERSON, regardless of whatever shit he went through and how he dealt with it.

He flaunted drugs on his IG, yes. But it was mostly likely a cry for help considering this guy was obviously depressed. Anyone can see that based on his tweets and captions. Stop being so fucking ignorant.

 

Y'all pretend to be fake woke and give a shit about mental illnesses but when it comes to people doing drugs then they become the scum of the earth to you. Fuck off.

He was unsympathetic, insensitive and not giving a fuck for his own family the people he would break their hearts. I feel bad for his family and friends, but not for him. IF he gave a damn especially since he knew very well he risks of killing himself, he wouldn't waste his life like that and disappoint his mother.

Junkies that have no regard to anything, not even their own family are a waste.period. Fuck off

I shouldn't have to edit the post to mention that disrespectful comments are unwelcome but I will. That's a shame. I was hoping there could be a discussion about mental illness and drug use in the current state of stardom but it's sad that some people have to take it to another level.

 

^

We are all allowed to voice opinions sweetie, deal with it. The same way you are allowed to say your part, I am as well, we all are and we will say what we think. Its called "freedom of speech" get used to it.

You want people to stop abusing drugs and killing themselves? Then stop enabling them and approving of their shitty excuses. That guy didn't respect himself, he didn't respect his family, he didn't respect his own mother who was close to him. Why should I respect him? I don't care for his lame excuses, they are still excuses.

He was "mentally ill" but he had no problem to encourage his friends to snort lines with him. Is this how he "cares" for his friends? His own self? He didn't care for anything.His only concern was drugs. IF he was sympathetic (hilarious how you call me unsympathetic while this guy wasn't even sympathetic to himself and his own friends and family) he wouldn't even encourage his friends to snort with him. He would do it alone.

I was waiting for someone to say this. 

 

Peep was an addict but he was also a person. Struggling with a dependency condition isn't that simple. Think what you will about addicts but it's horrific when anyone dies from these circumstances. 

I have lost friends to addiction. Please think about what you say before you say it you unfeeling asshole.

if you were waiting for someone to say this then you know it's truth too.

Peepah was an unfeeling asshole who didn't even care for his life or for anyone else. If he really cared he wouldn't disappoint his family and mother like that.He wouldn't break his mom's heart like that and not let her down. I don't care for junkies that waste their lives like that and not giving a single fuck for their own well being, not giving a fuck for their family, they only care for their next dose. I feel more sorry for his family, not him. And i will feel sorry for every innocent kid and adults that struggle with life threatening health issues and cancer, not for junkies.the drugs were more important to him, he knew there is major risk of dying and breaking his familys hearts.He didn't care.period.

a major druggie who even advocated drug use on his ig all the time. i wont even feel sorry for him. good innocent little children die of cancer everyday, and this little junkie idiot gives away his life like that.better talented people died of addiction than this guy and it did nothing for anti-addiction. pretty much the opposite in fact, it just compelled people to do it more bc they think living fast and dying young is "coool".
I feel only sorry for his family losing their kid,but that kid is an idiot for wasting his life like that and not giving a fuck for his own life.if he doesn't care for his life then nobody else will.

I think the fact that she wrote Cola 4+ years ago almost makes her feel worse? Because that was when Harvey was doing this gross shit and either she was oblivious or made herself believe it was okay because everyone else made it seem like a normal thing he did. We now know that so many women tried to come forward in the past 10, 20, whatever number of years and no one would listen. I think we can all tell that she has become a much more sympathetic/empathetic person with many of LFL's songs being about current topics that affect everyone in this country/world, not just her personal relationships/feelings. I think she feels bad for glamorizing something that caused so many so much pain. In comparison to her songs about the abuse she personally experienced, those songs were for her to work through those times and gain better understanding. Cola is completely different from those songs.

 

You know when you wrote shit in a journal like 4 years ago and then you go back and read it and it has a much different meaning now? I think that's Cola for her and that's why she pulled it. I mean I'm sure she also knew people would give her shit for it, but I think equally as much its meaning just changed for her.

 

I think also she's understanding that her music does have an affect on the world and on her fans. Like with her deleting all her instas/tweets, and also just with the fact that she's said so many times that LFL was not only for her but for her fans too. She's becoming more aware and more vocal and I'm honestly proud of her for feeling more comfortable to speak up about the things she cares about. If anything, I think that's also part her "fuck what you think, I'm going to do what I think is right/what I believe in" attitude.

A lot of these women that came forward after 10-15-20 years had many chances in the past to TRY and come forward.In fact a lot of them accepted payments and settlements. How come and they were totally fine to accept money at first place? Even one of them after the alleged rape,she got into a personal relationship with him and was getting money,gifts etc too.Great logic, she claims she got raped and next she dates her rapist? Very fishy.

While there is no doubt that Harvey did a lot of shit to many women, there is also a very large number of women that exaggerated/lied for their benefit.

It's not about being more sympathetic or not, she has always cared and being sympathetic towards every situation. Why would she feel bad for "glamorizing" something that caused pain?The manson murders didn't cause any pain? Because she sings about those in heroin. The jonestown massacre didn't cause any pain? Because she used that too for Freak last year.Pedophilia,domestic violence etc don't cause pain?Because she sings about those too.She performed Lolita too. Of course Lana does care and always cared for every situation and for what people think but she is not being politically correct.

There is no difference between all those horrible events,they are all horrible crimes.The murders,massacre,violence,pedo, and the harvey case.

"I think also she's understanding that her music does have an affect on the world and on her fans."

Oh? Is that why she is glamorizing murders?the massacres?violence?pedophilia? You make no sense, if that was the case then Lana wouldn't sing about any of those.

"Like with her deleting all her instas/tweets, and also just with the fact that she's said so many times that LFL was not only for her but for her fans too."

Actually she restored most of her old ig posts and she sings the UV line again.So the above doesn't apply either.

I think its wrong to cherry pick and try to compare those cases because they are not even different.They are all horrible cases that did/still do cause pain.If Lana is about to start censoring herself and retire cola then she should retire her other songs too.

The only reason she retired Cola is just to save her career and avoid people attacking her.

Looks more like Elle than Lana. Are Lana's tits that big btw?

Didn't know this thread was about Barrie ! sorry SWM for getting off topic 

So you can't answer the fact that Barrie follows and interacts with a bunch of underage female Lana fans & even posts kisses and approving messages on videos of these underage girls sucking on their fingers seductively. Yet you get offended over Harvey's name lmao! The hypocrisy lives on. Not sure how disapproving of this makes me a single white male, but I guess that's your attempt at diverting the convo again?

Even if it _is_ a reference to Harvey (I did look up their pics), that doesn't it's more than just a one liner and that the song is exclusively about him. When you consider the fact she only writes about men who she's had relationships, it's pretty obvious it's more likely written about Arthur Miller, maybe even Gene Campbell.

The sky line is in reference to the Beatles, it's not about making him a God. Jesus.

They're hypocrites, plain and simple. It's why LaMartine openly admitted she will not quote and answer everything I wrote and it's why salvatore keeps dodging the question about Barrie meanwhile acting like he's in hysterics over Harvey being mentioned in Cola as well as my first post to him which he conveniently dodged too. They don't give a shit about these girls that were abused by Harvey. They only pretend to care so they're not looked upon as enabling assholes and get shunned, and that's exactly why Lana is appeasing to this as well.

yea im pretty sure barrie wasn't married

 

yea im pretty sure barrie doesn't have enough influence to be seen a god in the sky

 

yea im pretty sure barrie isnt close to being rich enough to throw diamonds and glamour to any young girl that wants to follow him to the end

 

You know exactly what I meant.

And you know exactly what I meant, it's why none of you can answer my questions and keep dodging them actually. Just like my previous post to you that you couldn't answer, and now the question about Barrie lmao. So it's okay for Barrie to find underage girls sexually attractive to the point of posting kisses on videos of them sucking their fingers seductively?

barrie is not a Harvey type character

You sure abt that? He follows a bunch of underage girls on his Instagram and commented with kisses on a 16 year old girls video of her sucking on her fingers seductively. And he knows that girl is underage because he even posted about her going missing last year, citing her age and everything. Even Emile in one of Lana's videos on Instagram said a bunch of "Lolita" girls message him, so obviously this isn't a foreign concept for people affiliated with Lana. Difference is, Barrie took it a step too far. Barrie isn't innocent, and I bet there's a reason Lana stopped following him again after she liked his Negative Creep by Nirvana tweet in Jan 2016.

and i never found that interesting to talk about. Never was interested in Manson or references of him, but that's what American's do and talking about Manson isn't prohibited like talking about Harvey isn't prohibited just to remind you. But talking about having a consensual relationship with him now that he's a known rapist/harasser, and that many women for 30 years were afraid to come off as liars because rape culture makes the song embarrassing. Not the same thing that censorship is. All these women (and others) stayed shut because relationships with moguls were portrayed like in that song: it's their fault, they were the instigators, they wanted the jewels, the favours and to become famous, they started it, and thus they are lying about being raped. It furthers a toxic culture and lana is seeing it's doing more harm than good and she doesn't like it anymore. She doesn't like it, but y'all don't want to understand that. It will probably take her some time to start seeing things differently. 

 

But if you're going to be like this and belittle me because I don't agree with you, all right. But you can't dump all examples into one mold and then talk about double standards.   

Exactly. You said it right there.You only care what you are interested in or things that only affect you. You just admitted it. In your first response to me you said "those murders don't affect me, I'M a woman in the workforce. I'M, I'M, I'M" and now you're further reiterating saying "IIII never found that interesting to talk about. NEVER INTERESTED ME" you DON'T truly care about these issues as a whole and only bat an eye at the risk of things affecting YOUR life. Selfish and concerning. It reminded me of how Rose McGowan defended the convicted child molester Victor Salva saying he's sweet and gentle and that she isn't interested in what he did and now she's trying to besmirch actors names because of Harvey.

You say "Lana also quoted the crystals line "he hit me and it felt like a kiss". Both songs, UV and and Cola, feature things that Lana has grown out of and doesn't want to perform anymore" but Lana has been singing the he hit me line at her most recent shows. She stopped for a couple and now she's singing it again. Grown out of it? Obviously not. Or did you conveniently forget that just like you conveniently forgot that besides namedropping Harvey in Cola, Lana sings about an array of fucked up things in her songs and references very real, heinous crimes on top of that too? It is a double standard bc you are pretending to be offended over a predators name being mentioned in a song but NOT offended over another predator being namedropped in a song. The same way you say people simplify these sexual abuse victims, is the same way you simplified murder victims simply by referring to them as "cold dead" as if they never suffered BEFORE being "cold dead" to their last breath or their families never suffer. Try telling their families that and see how far you get. What do they have? A Lana Del Rey song and video that glamorizes their families murders to comfort them? Hilarious. You say "historically artists have always referred to the past to make a point about the present" and how does Freak's Jonestown massacre video make a point about the present other than doing it simply for aesthetic pleasure? Heroin? You cant answer these things because you know it's simply to evoke visuals for the listener and/or viewer. For you these things are more visually pleasing than picturing Harvey's big fat body dominating actresses. I dont know why you just dont admit it, because that's all it boils down to in the end. You say "I won't quote everything you say" and that's because you can't answer it. 900+ families involved in the Jonestown massacre but you ignored that. Now you're getting your panties tied up over Harvey having his name in Cola.

You excuse the Harvey censorship saying "It furthers a toxic culture and lana is seeing it's doing more harm than good" but what does Ultraviolence do? What does Heroin do exactly? Hundred Dollar Bill? Smarty? What do most of Lana's songs do regarding being involved with dangerous men, some that "swing at her" and she says she likes it, domestic violence, some that live generally risky lifestyles, suicide, being a side bitch, pedophilia, etc? Those do not "further a toxic culture"? Because I see a lot of "nymphets" on tumblr and instagram, some that are very young, listen to Lana and fall into these topics, quoting Lana's songs to confirm to themselves that it's all okay. So how come Harvey's name in Cola furthers a toxic culture, yet Lana's other material (and we all know there's LOTS of it) doesn't?

i'm not gonna quote everything you say and answer in full, I'm just gonna say that I don't see everything in black and white I don't apply moral calvinism for what is right and what is wrong, neither do I believe the 60s to be the beacon of what is le bon gôut. I never said sexual harassment was worse than murders, unfortunately those women, men and children who were:are harassed find i more difficult to come out: a lot of these women have claimed that their managers instead of protecting them pushed them to harvey saying that he was a scary guy and of they could survive a meeting with him they were strong and could survive anything. These people because of the culture got used to be treated like victims, and the abuse and rape has become something that had to be endured because that's the way of the business. Harvey was a bully and was also somewhat close to Lana. For me, this doesn't even compare to the 60s murders, it's a different league of affair completely that I see through to new lenses. Lana has written a song that was supposed to be ironic and fun about a mogul preying on women and doing the fast life, she also quoted the crystals line "he hit me and it felt like a kiss". Both songs, UV and and Cola, feature things that Lana has grown out of and doesn't want to perform anymore. It's like most of us who cringe at stuff we said and did 4 years ago except that for her it's released songs. So what, she wants to take it out?? She's needs time or she's acquiring a new perspective? I don't remember myself or people on this forum throwing stones at her tbh. I just believe that an artist who decides to take something off is mostly for personal reasons like growth, doubt and etc not just for fear mongering and censorship like y'all are implying. And an Artist should be free to take back what they said and change their opinions. Cola is a song that heavily implied Harvey and featured a starlet that was very eager to be in a relationship with him despite the public opinion and "his wife". And now lana realises that that stuff isn't funny anymore, because what was really happening were a plethora of women getting harassed and getting raped. The song that heavily implied Harvey, someone she knew, wasn't the same song anymore. And now, if i may add, with time she can change the lyric and take back her song, that's what i believe. Would that even happen? 

 

It's like you don't wan to see how things are supposed to be seen individually and not all dumped in the same bucket, she's not singing about murdering celebrities/people for a current manson figure. She was singing about being in a consensual scandalous relationship with a man-figure she knew very well and now turns out to be a rapist/harasser and she's taking it back. But I don't think we will ever agree on things because we really don't see things the same way. 

It's not about black and white but truth is that sexual abuse victims do have more chances than murder victims for obvious reasons.It's not about making something more important than the other or label an incident as "okay" to talk about after a certain period of time because that is not even possible.No matter how many years will pass whether an incident happened in the 60s or 70s or 80s or happening right now or will happen tomorrow they are all still horrible and vile crimes with victims. Every victim is important, living and dead ones.The families have to live and deal with the horrible memory of what happened to their beloved ones, living or dead.The dead victims don't even have a chance to live, don't even have a chance for their voice to be heard, they have nothing they are done, they are permanently done in every way.

Lana wrote Cola way before any of those allegations surfaced.It has nothing to do with what Harvey did.As for the Harvey case and the victims, a lot of those victims stories are very questionable and hard to believe. There is no doubt that a certain number of those victims are lying for their benefit. Lana is not just singing about being in a consensual scandalous relationship with a rich man she knew, because that very same scenario happens everyday. It's a reality that always existed and will keep existing.

The only reason she removed the song now is to not have people bullying her and trying to ruin her career.The same way she is upset for the murders,violence,pedophilia,every other incident she is singing about in her songs,she will be upset for this too and all the future incidents as well.

The "time heals" and "it needs time to overcome censorship" is pure bullshit to me personally because nobody can be absolutely sure how much time a certain incident,a murder,a rape,an assault,any other horrible incident that happened years ago or recently or will happen tomorrow will need to "transcend censorship" because everyone is different, each individual will react differently, the victims families will never "be okay" with the movies,the songs,art about what happened to their beloved ones.Many artists sang abt those right at the time the incident was still "fresh", some people were fine with it and some were not. Some others reacted and so on. Lana wants and is free to sing about all of those in her songs with no exceptions.She should be able to sing about Cola too the same way it is "okay" for her to sing for the manson murders,lolita,massacres etc without having a bunch of hypocrites running to label her as rape enabler or any other vile remark just because they lack of common sense.They don't like her singing about Harvey?They shouldn't like either her singing about pedophilia,murders,domestic violence either.

I don't agree with you, I actually think time changes perspective on things. What is general culture and what is hot piping current events are two different things, this is why people say "it's too soon". I am personally more affected by the Harvey Weinstein claims because i'm a young woman soon to be thrust into the workforce, 1960s sociopathic sex cults and murderers don't affect me the same way even tho they were horrific. They have relevance today and have been analysed/talked about enough that time allows for an artist to quickly cite them in their body of work; I'm not against Lana talking about dark themes and in fact there are elements of pedophilia , female subjugation/objectification that ring true and grounds her art in real life.

 

And historically artists have always referred to the past to make a point about the present rather than use what is going on if it's sensitive and there's censorship. And I believe that an artist censoring themselves isn't losing, a good and mature artist probably is capable of getting their point across differently.   

 

Like think about "The Betrothed", the novel by A. Manzoni: it's considered one of the main opuses of italian literature, the first italian modern novel and the first one to use modern italian. It was written when the country was under foreign (Austrian) occupation and it was strictly forbidden to talk negatively about the regimen but "lucky for him" Italy has already been occupied different times by other nations. Manzoni "pretended" (everyone knew it was a bluff/not real/jocking) that he found a manuscript in an attic about a romance and updated the language for current readers. But the book isn't just about that, (not only it tackles themes of human psyche and morality) it's about living under Spanish occupation, how it means for a country and its functioning and how it affects every strata of a society; and more importantly it was absolutely a critique of the "current" austrian occupation and somewhat a pamphlet for a free country.

A lot of artists flirt between what is acceptable and what is taboo, and it is a widespread belief that time changes perspectives, there's no strict rule to how handle events except of what the general population think. It may not seem logical for some but it is for me, I understand that if we cared, we will always have to deal to what is average/acceptable by popular standards. And maybe it upsets lana personally how someone she knew was harassing maybe raping so many women, when something makes you this uncertain then you take it out until you can articulate your feelings better and you (and in this case) society have/s healed.Also the crimes aren't even the same, sexual harassment and murder aren't the same. Murder victims are cold dead and sexual harassment victims have a hard time to be heard to be believed ,that's why it's delicate; and this is just to see things one way before i write a novel about that too. I mean I don't really know much about the philosophy of passing of time, but if I did i think I would do a better job at expressing myself because Time allows for things to become from personal to belonging and available to everyone. So if you can't see how things can change when time passes we will never agree. Anyway in a broad sense I expect an artist to be smart about their art, not everything should be spoon fed in a low context matter where everything is super direct, and artist also have the ability to change their opinions. Lana had a some time to process the weinstein matter, by the time this interview happened a lot of articles talked about "cola" specifically so she knew what everyone was thinking. She made the decision to take it off, and probably she discussed that with the interviewer beforehand that's why it seems she's heavily suggesting. Just because an artist seems to "cater" and to "self-censor" doesn't always mean it's a bad thing. They are people too and when new information arrives they also need the time and take a step back to think about this on a greater perspective and scale, this is how people continue on learning and maturing.  

You basically admit that you don't care for the murders because it doesn't affect you "the same way" and you only care for the weinstein incident because it's new. So that means in 5-10 years you won't care for that either anymore? Interesting view. Also Manson was trying to be a musician and couldn't make it so he used young people to commit heinous crimes in his honour to gain a "legacy".

But what is making a "point" in Heroin, Freak music video about the present? Lana filmed a rape reenactment vid with Eli Roth and you know there is people in the world being raped right now. Too soon?

"Murder victims are cold dead and sexual harassment victims have a hard time to be heard to be believed ,that's why it's delicate;"

What about the families affected?They never stop grieving.900+ families affected by Jonestown massacre that Lana uses in her Freak video. So if Harvey killed these girls Lana could keep the Cola line because the girls would be dead. right? She made the choice to take it off (not that she had any choice in this anyway) because she would be called a rapist enabler simply because it's "new".

You say "time healsss" then I guess judging by your argument you won't care for the Harvey incident victims in a few years either. I want to see how "time will heal" the dead victims though. They don't even have any time.They are dead.

What about the references Bowie, Ramones and Neil Young and more artists made about Manson very early too? It wasn't decades later.They made references too soon after the murders.There wasn't enough time passed for it to be "okay to be referenced" in due time. So?

How exactly those tragedies "transcended censorship" just because they are decades old? What about the manson murders and how Sharon Tate was brutally murdered with her baby still inside her?? What about her sister that is still alive to this day and has to live everyday with the horror of what happened to her sister? Are you going to tell her "hey get over it.it's decades old.people can sing about it" ?

What about the 900+ dead people in Jonestown massacre? They are all dead. It's okay to sing about them but not for Harvey? How? Who says that?

You are acting like being a sexual abuse victim is worse than being murdered. What logic is this? You don't even know what these murdered victims went through before their final breath. Murder victims don't even have a second chance.They can't do anything, time won't "heal" them.They are dead. At least sexual abuse victims as horrible as it is,they still have a pulse.

Sexual abuse victims have a chance in life to live and heal as much as possible and see better and happy days.The families still have the person in flesh with them even if they get sexually abused.The dead victims don't even have that.The horror and pain they went through before leaving their last breath I guess doesn't matter right? Because they are cold dead. Their families living with the memory of this don't matter either probably yes?  What do murder victims families have? Songs by Lana?

You think that Lana would censor Cola if she could get away with people calling her a rape enabler and bully her and try to ruin her career? Nop, she would keep it exactly like how she has kept every other controversial topic in her songs. She only censored it because she knew people are hypocrites and would try to ruin her.

Murder victims don't have a chance to rehabilitate their lives. Sharon Tates baby didn't even get a life. No problem though, it doesn't matter it happened in the 60s. Her living sister doesn't matter either. Sharon is just a cold dead apparently.

You have no idea what the murder victims went through before dying.The horror and pain and agony often times fighting for their lives before dying.

An example out of thousands: Jyoti Singh was an indian young 23 yo girl that got gang raped brutally in 2012.She died 13 days later due to her injuries.That girl fought for her life, she wanted to live.Despite what happened to her she wanted to live. She doesn't matter either anymore I guess.Her family doesn't matter either.She's a cold dead now.

While all those incidents are horrible, we need to keep in mind that despite the differences obviously in being a dead victim or an alive victim there is no doubt that any victim, all victims do have indeed a "second chance" if you'd like to call it that way because they are still breathing and moving as best as possible with support through life. Dead victims have nothing.No chances, no voices, nothing.

The point is not to make a difference or set a standard to judge what is "ok" and what is "not ok" to use as reference in songs, arts, books, movies, music videos and so on. Every situation, every crime are all either ok to be used in arts,songs etc or not ok at all. Obviously Lana and any other artists don't have any bad intentions with writing those songs. However it's hypocritical to cherry pick and point a finger at them to yell "you will only sing about those murders because yayy they happened 5-20-40 years ago so it's cool, but not about Harvey because of the victims that came forward with their stories 20 years later and it's delicate and "fresh" eventhough the stories are not even fresh they happened 20 years ago but yeah let's jump on the same bandwagon as everyone does and ignore also the families of the dead victims,and sharon's sister living everyday with the memory and the movies and songs about her sisters death so yeah, don't sing about Harvey Lana, we will bully you and call you a rape enabler."

All of those cases are all equally delicate. We can't cherry pick and say one is okay and the other is not okay to sing about. We will either be okay with all or not with any at all.

i think it's because it's not an abstract theme you can "comfortably" quote rn? manson and jonestown were specific events that happened decades ago and are used often as reference in general culture, like dropping a bar like "she eat your heart out like Jeffrey Dahmer"  in a pop song. And pedofelia is a dark theme, but she uses a renowned classic novel to draw the imagery not a recent case? 

I think like in 5/10 years it's going to be the same for Weinstein, his name won't be just *His* but it's going to be a label for that kind of behaviour and people will name drop him too as the hollywood mogul executive who preyed on women but rn because of him a lot of people are coming out about their experience, and not just women: men and (former) child stars. So it's delicate because it involves people and eventual new voices. 

 

And I agree about the suggestive interview, altho it could have been planned in advance? I don't know if they still do that but the girl interviewing her was really cognisant about lana's body of work and they both seemed comfortable, maybe they reviewed the points they were going to talk about before to give structure to the interview. The Harvey thing is super delicate as I said previously, so I don't think Lana would talk about it without working on her statement before hand. 

I don't think its a matter of being "comfortable" to quote now or tomorrow or in 5-10 years. The manson murders and jonestown massacre just because they happened decades ago doesn't mean its "okay or not okay" then and now to use as reference.They are horrible events that no matter how many years will pass they will be still important and shocking parts of history.

Who says it will be ok in 5-10 years for weinstein? and not just for weinstein but for any horrible event like the manson murders.who says when it's 'okay' or not for that and how they draw the line for the Harvey incident but not for the manson murders? No it's not delicate because it involves people and new voices, they are all delicate not just the Harvey incident. the manson murders is delicate too, jonestown massacre is delicate too, pedophilia, violence and so on. They are all important. If singing about manson is "okay" then it should be "okay" for Cola too. There is no difference in those events because they are all in fact important and shocking and horrible. As for the Harvey case, the only "new and fresh" bit is the exposure of Harvey's actions. The stories of those women that came forward are not "fresh". They all came forward to share stories that happened 5-10-20 years ago.

If people are okay with lana or any other artist singing about the manson murders,jonestown,lolita and pedophilia,violence etc then they should be okay for Harvey in the Cola song too. No exceptions. They can't cherry pick and say "Oh! I love when lana is singing about the manson murderss in that song yess i love it, but no no no i dont want her to sing about Harvey in that song". This is hypocritical. They either won't like ALL of those songs or they like them all. No exceptions.

Lolita is meant to be taboo and fit a very specific theme; it's also considered to be a classic novel, much like clockwork orange. incredibly awkward themes but its meant to be like that

 

Jonestown n Manson at this point are decades old and pop culture references- tragedies but something that transcended censorship. 

 

the Harvery situation is a helluva lot different- for Lana the song and the idea was a joke, it's an obvious hollywood speak n tell that Harvey was a predator but people either played the rumors like a joke or were silenced, Lana had no harmful intention when writing the song but seeing how big of a monster that man was and how many women he's scarred it probably upset her. That the whole fantasy to her was a joke while there were many women that had to deal with the abuse and rape as a reality, it must feel v shitty for her to think about any damage she could've caused at potentially normalizing or downplaying a real life offender

 

it'd be like if Foster The People wrote and played pumped up kicks as a hollow; neutral intended song, but then a month later something the size of columbine happened, obviously didnt mean it but it becomes a horrific reality to some people

Well of course Lolita and that theme is a taboo. It's about an adult molesting a 12 year old.Also there is rumors about the author of Lolita being a pedophile.As for clockwork orange, UV was named after that novel and that novel features probably the most famous rape scene in a movie of all time. Yet lana is singing without any problem about all the above. There is no issue singing for the manson murders or the jonestown massacres (where 909 people died) or pedophilia,domestic violence,etc yet somehow its not "ok" for her to sing about Harvey? Says who?

And how exactly those tragedies "transcended censorship" just because they are decades old? What about the manson murders and how Sharon Tate was brutally murdered with her baby still inside her?? What about her sister that is still alive to this day and has to live everyday with the horror of what happened to her sister? Are you going to tell her "hey get over it.it's decades old.people can sing about it" ?

What about the 900+ dead people in Jonestown massacre? They are all dead. It's okay to sing about them but not for Harvey? How? Who says that?

Ramones, Neil Young, David Bowie, and many more acts were singing about the Manson murders/referring to Manson very early on,so is time still an issue for these people? what about all the rappers who refer to heinous crimes making punchlines out of them too?

"time" is no excuse whether it's decades old, or 1 year old or fresh. People use columbine,manson etc all the time. It's not even a matter of what is "socially acceptable" either. It's not socially acceptable to sing about being beaten either but lana does it. so what?

I think it's utterly ridiculous to say that Lana is upset by the Harvey incident because I'm sure she is helluva upset about the manson murders too, the jonestown massacre,pedophilia,violence. She is upset for ALL of those things but she still sings about all of them, so why not sing about Harvey too? There is absolutely no logic in this. No logic at how people assume and say "ohh it's okay for lana to sing about manson murders who cares its decades old but noooo it's not okay to sing about Harvey" Where is the logic? I see none. Just because one event is 5-10-20 years old doesn't take away the horror and importance from it. They will be all equally upsetting.

We can't be "okay" with one and "not okay" with the other. We will be okay with ALL of them or not at all.

The only reason lana agreed and did the smart move to remove Cola is because people will be disgusting and try to bully and ruin her. Not because it "upset" her. Yes what happened with Harvey upset her just like how the manson murders and pedophilia and everything else she sings about in her songs upset her too.

You guys keep mentioning that with time these cases push through censorship, so what? Does that change the pain of over 900 families? That's how many died in jonestown. Does that change the 7 victims families that were left affected by the murders the manson family carried out? Will the pain miraculously disappear for the victims of Harvey Weinstein? No. So how come in your minds Lana singing about the manson family, domestic violence, pedophilia etc and demonstrating rape in the video with eli roth or mass murder like in jonestown massacre inspired freak video is ok due to "time passing"? people are still widely affected by this and copycat crimes too. no matter how much time passes, one isn't better than the other.

You guys just want to make yourselves feel better about your hypocrisy towards the matter because you conveniently forgot that the other things Lana sings about that you love and treasure is just as "bad" as the Harvey line in Cola.

I liked this interview! and lana looked so comfortable with the interviewer! but I feel there was a part that I believe was unnecessary and kinda forced and made Lana feel uncomfortable. When the interviewer asked her about Cola... the way she practically forced Lana to agree to remove the song from the list with how she was like "a song you will retire from the catalogue now?" Lana didn't have really a choice but to agree..

I understand that she absolutely supports the women and she also pointed that out but that song was written way before the harvey allegations surfaced. It has nothing to do with what Harvey did. It's just a song. Besides what's the difference? Heroin refers to the Manson Family murders w/ the blood on the walls and even namedropping him in the opening line,jonestown massacre in the original UV video/freak video, the pedo (lolita) theme, violence references in her songs? why censoring Cola? by that logic she should censor the rest songs too.