here are some hyper-polluting individuals:
- the Rolling Stones’ Boeing 767 (5,046 tonnes of CO2)
- Lawrence Stroll (1,512 flights)
- Thirty-nine jets linked to 30 Russian oligarchs – (30,701 tonnes of CO2)
relevant quote:
But I will say this, a movement can't get along without a devil, and across the whole political spectrum there is a misogynistic tendency to choose a female devil, whether it's Anita Bryant, Hillary Clinton, Marie Antoinette, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or J.K. Rowling [or Taylor Swift]. And there's always gonna be people who seize on any opportunity to be misogynistic. So I would advise trans people and our allies [or environmentalists] to keep in mind, that J.K. Rowling [Taylor Swift] is not the final boss of transphobia [anti-environmentalism]. She's not our devil. The devil is the Republican Party, the Conservative Party.
—Natalie Wynn (emphasis and bracket text mine)
edit: if you can’t respond to this without using the c*nt expletive it is not helping your case lmao. mods are we okay with this? in any case, please don’t feed the trolls.
edit 2/FAQ: “but why did she threaten legal action against that college kid though?” still shitty, but refer to this comment for a good explanation of the context behind that decision.
She only threatened legal action since those memes started before when her flight movements got the attention of the right in an attempt to make her less credible of a voice speaking out against trump. And knowing how batshit insane trump cultists can be and how she’s basically the single most hated person of his base I’m not surprised that she feared for her security. Those records were public for years but the legal action only happened after someone created that meme and even fox news suddenly cared about plane emissions…
[…] For Swift, this is legitimate fear. I don't know if you've ever experienced actual fear for your life, but it's crippling, and it effects your psyche. To experience that on a daily basis because of an app? You bet your goddamn ass I'm going to talk to my lawyers about what my options are.
sources/timeline for the above:
- mid 2022, the media begins scrutinizing Swift for her flying patterns
- in response, Swift’s jet drops from 19 to just over 2 flights per month
- her flights pick up slightly with the start of her massive Eras tour but still significantly less than pre-July 2022
- December 6, 2023, Swift embroiled in election conspiracy theory, basically making her MAGA’s enemy number one.
- January 30, 2024, Taylor Swift gets rid of one private jet
- February 6, 2024, news outlets first report on the cease and desist.
I’m not sure I fully understand the criticism to be perfectly honest. Is it actually possible to have a mega pop star of that type without them having a more intensive carbon footprint? Like she can’t really fly commercially for a lot of reasons. Tour schedules are one thing but can you imagine the scene it would make?
Fame is really just letting one person, who we consider special for some reason, use the resources of many. They get to live an extravagant lifestyle and we get the cultural benefit their work.
Bottom line: private jet travel seems to me like a requirement of her job. I’m not about to sit here and shame everyone for the carbon output that their job requires of them. She is not some capital class, passive income, leech. The lady works.
FWIW, I don’t really think I could name or identify one of her songs. Everything I know about her is what bleeds through into my media sphere. She could be a real shitheal for all I know.
The issue isn’t that she has a private jet or uses it, it’s that it’s used for 13 minute flights.
https://www.newsweek.com/taylor-swift-private-jet-jack-sweeney-flights-1868272
And also, that someone built software to show publicly available data on how inefficient the use of her jet is, and then her team threatened legal action against them
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-swift-jet-tracking-legal-threat/
Her jet was 28 miles from it’s destination, the president of the United States still travels that destination by vehicle (granted it’s a motorcade) but still far more environmentally friendly than burning fossil fuels in a jet to hop over to the next airport
really that depends on a number of factors. like how big the jet is, etc.
some of those planes are pretty small.
my friend and i worked with a guy for many years, that was also a pilot. he was a pretty frugal dude, but was fairly smart with his money. flying his small plane was a bit of a hobby for him. he owned a store location in the city we were in, but also had another store location about a hour/hour-and-half drive. sometimes he would take his plane, as it was actually cheaper and faster to go to the airport, get his plane prepped, fly out, do whatever he had to do, and fly back.
undoubtedly he was using this as an excuse to fly his plane a bit. but i definitely know he wouldn't have been doing it if it was costing him any significant amount of money. he wasn't loaded, and was always about saving some money.
ok but I don't think many billionaires are out there flying Cessnas to save a bit of money.
There's no way that was a jet. A jet is in an entirely different class than a little prop plane... It's like comparing a motorcycle to a tank
Meh, sometimes I drive places a really should have walked. Same shit different scale. I am not moved to anger by this. Eliminate fame or accept that it’s resource intensive.
Yeah that's kind of the entire point.
sounds like you are part of the problem
For the short trips, there's literally no reason not to have a car and a chauffeaur.
How does car get to the place the jet landed? Another bigger jet full of cars? That’s how the presidential motorcade works. Seems really consumptive, but it’s one person who leads a nation of 350M, so it also doesn’t make me angry.
jesse what the fuck are you talking about
A swiftie who's being really fucking obtuse.
different cars in different locations.
for example if she flys into a airport on the Eastern side of the country, you'd just contract out a car there. many airports even have multiple car rental companies on site to handle such things. for more upscale stuff, there are usually smaller flight companies around the airport, and they handle all the details.
you just fly the people in, they get the car at that location, and then drive to wherever they're going.
in the case of musicians, if they're on tour they usually have busses they charter, along with large semi trucks to drive the gear and stage stuff.
:::How does car get to the place the jet landed?
She rents one you smooth brain.
Sigh…
People who have enormous fame or import like miss swift can’t exactly travel public roads in an unmodified car from fucking Avis. Not only is fame a tremendous distraction on the road, but she is also a lightning rod for insane people who are known to be heavily armed.
I mentioned the president’s motorcade because she has some of the same problems. She and the president share security problems you don't have. Those security problems have expensive and carbon intensive solutions. You’re not smarter than all the people who work on the problem. I promise.
Now, before you start name calling on the internet why don’t you flip that dog’s breakfast of yours into the on position.
Eye roll.....
Yes they can and they do. I work for one of the big 3 and when I was an intern I had to do things like book travel for artists, including one of the biggest artists in the world, and they literally do just take an Addison Lee to the studio, or talk show or whatever they're doing.
Taylor Swift doesnt need a fucking motorcade and we dont need to bend over backwards to accommodate pop starts like they're fucking royalty.
Now please, take a moment before commenting on something you know literally nothing about to think if stating your irrelevant opinion as if its fact is worth anyones time reading it.
How does car get to the place the jet landed? By... driving there? What's the confusion? Why are you so concerned that someone will John Lennon her yet Keanu Reaves can take the subway?
Few centuries ago special people (who have power) have slaves but things have changed. Maybe they shouldn't do concerts every week all over the world, they shouldn't fly over the country to assist to the opening of some store,....etc.
You know things change and we should adapt.
Bleh, she's a brand, not a person, she doesn't work she's just a part owner of the brand, and celebrities need to be abolished anyway.