Unless you’re talking about someone you dated for one week in middle school? 😭

I think The Voice having created absolutely zero successful enduring pop careers despite a million seasons, even less than other formats, says it all. A good voice is not enough.

A million people can sing. It takes a lot more to be a pop star. To drop singles and albums that leave cultural impact and excite people and make them want more. To craft iconography. To provide something nobody else provides. Being able to sing and perform helps but comes down the line.

Like…Gaga can sing and is a fantastic performer but the thing that made her a pop star is the all around artistry, the visual package, the clear artistic voice pulling her work together, great production in service of her expression, consistent themes and a unique style that represent her.

These shows test for vocalists and live performers but that’s two of like 20 core skills to being a pop star, and not the most important ones. These artists keep failing to launch careers because they’re vocalists, not all around pop artists. They aren’t releasing packages that excite people.

I know pop musicians employ writers, I’m not a complete idiot 😭

All these competition shows test is live vocals and stage presence, which are ultimately rather secondary for a pop star. Most of the greatest vocalists out there don’t make particularly great pop stars because vocalist isn’t the job, pop star is.

Completely besides the point. It’s got nothing to do with ownership of the songs and everything with what being a pop star actually entails, and that is producing and promoting audiovisual packages of original material, whether written by the artist or not, not singing one song at a time on stage.

Kelly Clarkson got lucky that she ended up with some really good material but even she’s most relevant for performing covers now

Two things can be true:

- poor people often don’t have access to healthy, quality food

- an unhealthy meal with a tiny bit of vegetables in it isn’t meaningfully eating vegetables

And not only are they both true, they’re connected and we need to recognize it to get better for poor people.

“But that’s stigmatizing” no it’s not eat a fucking carrot. Have an orange. Not orange juice with the pulp removed, a fucking orange.

I think there’s some value to recognizing that fruit and vegetables in “unhealthy” meals are still fruit and vegetables but when you’re getting one tiny chunk of a vegetable in a meal prepared in a way that removes some of the nutrients that’s not meaningfully eating vegetables be so serious.

and mimosa is back in the top10 because of the vinyl release as well so she is charting SEVEN releases rn despite having only released one new song all year

and yes i bought all 6 and they're sitting in a warehouse in japan waiting to be forwarded to europe rn

Because the actual amount of muscle fiber growing should also be proportional to size of body so the only way it would look meaningfully bigger is if the arm or leg or whatever was way way way way shorter proportionally

I think that requires a much bigger difference in proportions between tall and short people than there really is most of the time. Like a short guy’s bicep would need to be WAY shorter not just in actual size but also in proportional size for there to be a visible difference in muscle scale

I think it’s conceivable that certain body types show muscle more obviously but not every tall person has a very lanky build and not every short person has a very wide build. A lot of short people have practically the exact same proportions as taller people and there’s gonna be NO difference there.

This seems from the same wishful thinking urban legend realm as “it’s so much easier for men to lose weight than women because men get to eat more calories” (men on average also NEED more, and need to cut more to lose an equivalent fat percentage, it’s literally all directly proportional 😭)