What I don't really understand is why exactly they thought it would be wise to do this to someone who is insanely, insanely famous.
This is in a way similar what happened to Prince.
You could probably get away with doing something like this to a relatively unknown artist - but once you start fucking around with megastars it's obviously going to become a huge ordeal.
Exactly! Doing this to her specifically is so foolish. From her history of discussing intellectual property in the arts publicly to her being a co-writer at least on all of her songs to her overwhelmingly massive fanbase, this is just insane. They picked the wrong one.
But it's the Masters that are being discussed, and her previous record company own them. Being co-writer or having publishing rights to her songs isn't in dispute - she's all good that way.
She doesn't own the Masters, and they're arguing she can't create new masters (which a live performance being recorded is) within the terms of the current agreement.
It's unfortunate for sure - but it's a legal argument, not a moral one
I know publishing is not in dispute. What I intended to convey was that a song-writer who writes all of their songs is more likely to take situations like this personally, they are less likely to let it slide and move on.
The sale was legal, and I'm not particularly upset that Taylor doesn't own the masters, as it's normal for artists to not own all of their masters. There are shady elements in the behavior from Scott and Scooter that we would not have necessarily expected from a sale. If they had questionable/petty intentions they should have not followed them for their own sake. Taylor and her fanbase are more powerful than them, and it's not worth it.
Edit: What offends me more than the creepy elements of it is probably the sheer idiocy of Scott and Scooter seemingly not thinking there are consequences to doing all of these things to Taylor Swift. The naiveté they have, and as seasoned professionals, too.
Load more comments
Presumably they assume you will either change your mind and decide to have a baby or accidentally get pregnant and have a baby. Many people who are opposed to legal abortion tend to have a default setting of assuming the people they know would not choose to have an abortion.
We stan Trouble and Love Bird <3
Also we laugh at Leona rejecting We Found Love because she wanted Trouble to be the lead single which would end up with Rihanna and being one of the biggest songs of the decade
Fun Fact it joins the long list of hits Leona rejected including:
Halo by Beyoncé
All of Me by John Legend
Burn by Ellie Goulding
What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Stronger by Kelly Clarkson
Impossible by Shontelle
Wow...that list is a bummer. Gives some context to her career losing steam.
The title track deserves justice!
Some people aren't very passionate, in which case having a child is often a good idea. Of course, there are parents who have passions, but we all need to find meaning and fulfillment in different ways. Parenthood is the vehicle to that for some people.
I don't really like the song, but I love french pop, so thank you for sharing. Perhaps I'll browse through her other songs.
Do they spent time and money on coming to see you? Probably not.
Your sister was probably pissed that she won't get 11 days of help with baby-sitting. I can't imagine why she'd be so bothered otherwise, considering you went out of your way to schedule several days for her.
She has never been to see me since I moved to New Hampshire. Neither has my parents.
This is telling and sad :( But it can also be good to have clarity from things like that.
Wow!! I love her. Please post more of her.
"But these are also the people who tell me that I should listen and give my phone number to guys on the street who stop me on the street to talk to me."
This pretty much sums it up. These are the type of guys who will spend their time sitting around drinking, never exercise, wear wrinkled/dirty clothes and still expect models to be desperate for them.
That you would be willing to turn down men who might even resemble them in certain ways is a threat.
I might be the odd one out, and full disclosure I haven't gone over to AITA yet so idk if OP speaks/"behaves" differently in the comments.
But from this post alone, I wouldn't consider OP the asshole. If they kept pressuring her about it or repeatedly ignored her desires, then yeah, definitely - but asking once, in a way that acknowledges her desires and limitations and is asking how far they extend, doesn't seem like a dick move on its own. Especially since they were offering a lot of support, financial and otherwise. I'm CF but hell, if I didn't have medical issues otherwise preventing it, I might be open to carrying a kid for someone I care about.
I am aware that this post is likely gliding over a lot - I can see the possibility for a lot of unspoken guilt-tripping bullshit in "explaining why it's important to us". But that would very much be extrapolation on my part, because without that extrapolation, the post and OP's behavior does seem reasonable, if it was in isolation.
I think so too. The post leaves one with some questions. I suspect she and the husband might have not fully understood how unlikely she was to say yes, and I get the feeling that failed in how they presented the idea. But I can't be offended by the idea of them asking unless the sister had expressed negative feelings about giving birth.
I guess the post in general makes me think there's a lot of subtext and even comments made that we're unaware of.
I don't think it's inappropriate that they asked. The sister was clear about not wanting children, but having children and giving birth are not exactly the same thing. In this case, though, that difference is essentially undone by the hypothetical baby being in the family. It's normal that a person who wants to have a baby isn't sensitive to that because they have a completely different perspective.
However, I am left with a lot of red flags from the post, from her referring to it as a 'request' multiple times, to the lack of clarity on whose egg is being used (if it's Sarah's then the baby is incestuous, that's out of the question), her telling too many people in her life about the conversation. I kind of assume there were a lot of blunders in how she went about it that she and her husband weren't aware of.
I feel like everyone in this situation has perhaps not been at their best.
"We invited Sarah over for dinner and at the end of it laid out our request." The key word being request. To me that's a red flag indicating you might not have been aware of how certain things you were saying were coming across for her. I don't think of this as a request. At best it's a proposal, an offer...and an extreme long-shot.
As a person who doesn't want to have children, I need to point out that you don't seem to have understood common though patterns of people who don't want to have children. Wanting to have children or being involved in an unplanned pregnancy and then having children is more common than choosing to not have children. Heterosexual/bisexual people who do not want to have children need to think ahead because they truly are not willing to become parents, and committing to that has a unique impact on their dating life and to a lesser extent their personal life or family life (though sometimes family members do turn on those who don't want children). So child-free people understand there are things that can unravel their choice, including dating someone with children, even if they might live elsewhere or be adults. In a scenario like this, for instance, that person's children might have children of their own and turn the partner into a constant baby-sitter. In this case, hypothetically if you and your partner died, your sister could be put in a position where she is pressured to become the guardian.
I don't think it's wrong that you didn't realize the full range of her perspective, whatever it might be. I don't think it's inappropriate that you asked. You never know what people will say until you ask...you really don't (all kinds of unexpected things happen, I read about a mother who acted as the surrogate for the baby of her gay son and an egg donor). I think some people responding here will disagree, but I stand by that. Almost everyone who doesn't want children would never agree to birth a baby, but one never knows. I also don't think your sister's inability to simply say no and discuss why is appropriate. Some or even most of that might be based in her feeling hurt by maybe thinking she was not believed when she had communicated she didn't want children. As a woman she would generally be disbelieved by others who think she will change her mind. She might think you two didn't take her seriously.
I hope you're doing well with this! Good luck.
I get the feeling that you might be projecting your desire for...something...into a dream of minimalism. I suspect this because it sounds like you already have a handle on your relationship with possessions and you said you're "not so happy with [your] life currently."
Minimalism isn't the main event in life. It helps people clear space so there's room for what it is they do want.
I think a Nicki and Cardi collaboration would be good. I get the feeling that feuds are often a publicity stunt anyway on some label (or start out that way), so this would bring them publicity. I also think they've both been incredibly immature regarding each other. A collab could be a good opportunity to grow.
It's sad because to me it sounds like at least the two children (not referring to the autistic child as that sounds like a different issue) have been spoiled. Once children are spoiled it can be really hard to push back on their sense of entitlement.
I like Muji, and I worked in one of their stores for a year. I appreciate the visual simplicity, and I still wear some of my shirts. I did, unfortunately, find that some of my thin shirts from them deteriorated quickly, but the thicker fabrics have been durable. I heard a customer say their diffuser was working well after having it for eight years, which I think is impressive.
It is ok to decide to have children and ok to decide not to. Your parents may struggle to understand, but remember, you are the one who will need to live with the decision every day, so your feelings are what matters.
This cat looks so sweet!
I don't think all the typical considerations apply for Richard Gere. He doesn't need to be the most physically active father in the world for his family to function successfully since he can pay for them to have assistance, which will lessen the required labor and stress involved. And ideally he'll be around until his children reach adulthood (not out of the question, as I think he seems pretty healthy), but regardless, when he dies his family will be financially secure.
Conservatorship? Is that a special contract with a corporation? Have to do with her Las Vegas residency? How did she ever get in this position where she has no creative control besides clearly her Instagram?
A conservatorship is a legal structure of assigning adults guardians (therefore essentially turning them into minors). This is done with people who are on some level impaired, and it prevents them from damaging their life beyond repair by taking away their right to make major decisions, like what they do financially or where they live. It was implemented after her infamous breakdown in 2007. For reference, Amanda Bynes is also still in a conservatorship.
🤯 omg. Is this done against their will? Legally, like the law forced her to do it, or her parents force her, or is this volitional? It’s been 10-11 years, that’s soooo long and sad for someone to lose their freedom. Is she really that bad that this is deemed appropriate or their likely some foul play happening. Are people taking advantage of her, financially or otherwise, because of this?
I guess you could say it's done against their will, sort of, but it's approved by the courts because they are deemed to be a liability to themselves and potentially others. Yeah, it's been forever. Only a tiny handful of people know Britney's medical and emotional state, so none of us can say with certainty whether or not it's still needed. On the other hand, everyone who has observed Britney's particular conservatorship knows things seem suspicious. Unfortunately, Britney has been taken advantage of so many times. She's been a cash cow for countless people, but the wealth her success has afforded her came at the loss of her freedom in so many ways. In my opinion, Britney's life is the closest comparison to the troubled nature of Michael Jackson's life, and I can only hope that hers will be much different in the end.
Load more comments
I'm so sorry <3 She was beautiful
Being a child is not an excuse for not having children? ....Yes it is!
It sounds like your mother wants you to be her incubator?
Meanwhile, totaling 6 cars in a year and still being a golden child! How does your brother afford car insurance? He should be moving to a city with a subway system, I can't imagine how he'll function long-term otherwise if he insists on crashing cars.
Fortunately, none of us have to tell you to get out because you're already doing it. Good luck! Be free from that circus.
This is out of date, and I think they are no longer being forced to sell. It is an extremely bizarre situation, with a huge amount of incompetence from the top management at grindr. Buzzfeed has an eye-opening article on it if you're curious.
The father has been very keen on the idea of taking the baby to work (he works in social work, which is mostly women, and it's not uncommon for them to bring their babies to work every day which ... ick, but whatever) and have one of those baby bjorns or whatever where you wear the baby. All my friend has said is that she won't allow the baby to change her plans for the future (buying a house, traveling the US, getting a full night's sleep) and that things will work out. They're not fabulously wealthy or anything. I've offered to be an honorary aunt to the kid, but ... I don't know, how am I the only one who views this as unhealthy?
All my friend has said is that she won't allow the baby to change her plans for the future (buying a house, traveling the US, getting a full night's sleep) and that things will work out.
It's not realistic. If they don't already have a few hundred thousand dollars they can part with, then their plans will change drastically.
This is a really though situation, and I'm sorry you find yourself caught in the middle. Of course, we all probably have the same opinion on which choice would be better for your friend, but this situation is one that changes things no matter what happens. Your friend's marriage is now precarious no matter what.
