it's just crazy to me that you have writers for sites like rolling stone and pitchfork trying to call out nas' misogynism while there are decades of abuses by white artists and other critical darlings that they just ignore, or sweep under the rug, until they can't anymore. they're smart enough to write about nas being a (pretty mild) misogynist but not to unpack the history of their publication's name, like rolling stone, or their place in music history, like pitchfork.
here's a few examples of the shyt i'm talking about:
- rolling stone is a magazine named after a group of men who have undoubtedly hit and taken advantage of women over the 50 years they've been around - definitely more than anyone they call out
- in 2010-2011 pitchfork pushed the hipster agenda around lana del rey being an industry plant and having no control over her music or image, which was a misogynist argument in itself. they've never looked back at their own conduct around it
- pitchfork JUMPED on the chicago stuff when keef blew up, put up a video dry snitching on him and got him arrested again. he was 17 or 18 at the time, and they were all adults who should've seen the risks of what they were filming. i've never seen them talk about it
- i'm not even going to bother to name the hundreds of artists who these publications adore who will never be held to account for stuff that they've done. but it's interesting to see that jay-z gets a free pass from all of them. nobody would deny that he's abused women in the past, but nobody wants to talk about it either. why the fukk do they think solange was
![demonic :demonic: :demonic:](https://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/fredo.png)
in the elevator
somehow all of this is a problem, but only for nas.