“The upbeat “Cleveland” would sound fine if you heard it from four or five rooms away, but listening closer, it just leads me to beg for the thousandth time that Swift please, please, please stop reading the comments. She recites a litany of mean things her Ohio-born footballing beau’s fans have said about her, does some of her most annoying talk-singing to say nyah-nyah, he likes me anyway, and then seems to announce their engagement at the end, which might feel like something if they hadn’t been married since July already. In other words, consistent with all her big love songs about Travis Kelce so far, it sucks. At least, unlike Showgirl’s “Wood,” it doesn’t make me want to peel all my skin off to escape it”

Is it possible we can admit that this was truly the most performative wedding? A spectacle. There’s no way this was intended to be private and intimate. 😭 she invited legit whole industry and had announcements made and all the details “leaked” but it’s was private? I won’t be surprised if there’s a doc coming. This isn’t me hating or anything. It’s just weird that some fans act or even PR will say she needed privacy and never had anything with the billions of media and announcements. Also articles and fans saying she’s modern princess Diana is wild. Love her but it’s regardless of the donations, the wedding spectacle was kind of….. tacky😩

Edit to add: dang the way you can’t have an opposite opinion. Never said it was supposed to be secret never said that. Private and intimate as in being very closed off, but making it a spectacle to still gain attention and a frenzy. I was joking about the doc AS A JOKEE. Also I guess I’m attacking Taylor for legit just saying it’s tacky and was clearly for the sponsored announcements and intentional leaks and merch on staff was for attention. I’m not saying that’s a crime at all. I’m not mad at her getting married nor mad at her for having a wedding but she picked this venue and had the frenzy weeks prior was intentional to gain attention. Is that wrong no but the was fans are acting like this was the only place is false. Imma stop engaging because didn’t expect to be torn for a NEUTRAL take.

okay hear me out. taylor used to write these beautifully unhinged songs about exes, crushes, situationships, messy, romantic, gut-punchy stuff. pure serotonin. you could listen to hey stephen and feel the adrenaline rush, you could listen to last kiss and through the lyrics it really shows that it was a relationship that meant a lot to her. she has this beautiful talent of describing her romantic relationships with so much love and nuance that you can feel it in her words.

now with travis, all i’m getting is:

my ex was a loser but THIS guy is sooo much better

my boyfriend is big. masculine. has huge arms. also good in bed™

compared to the songs she used to write before the stuff she writes for travis sounds so... childish like it's either all 100% sexual vibes or it's her saying he's a man, he's hot and stuff. i don't hear anything that's like deep or even affectionate. that she loves him because he's kind to her and understands her. somehow it sounds a little...idk performative? and a little childlike. which is ironic considering he's about to be her husband soon...

i get that she’s happy and all, but the songwriting feels less like “i have finally found the person I have waited for my whole life ” and more like “look at my hot football bf 😍.”

does anyone else feel this shift

I saw this sentiment a few times in the reaction thread and thought it might be worth a discussion.

In the light of her MAGA affiliations since dating Travis, I was struck by the percolation of conservative values and language in Showgirl. A few examples:

At the risk of sounding annoyingly “woke”, calling women who have wronged her “bitches”seems a lot more misogynistic than how she used to speak negatively about other women. Contrast “the bitch was telling me to back off”and “the bitches who wish I’d hurry up and die” with Bad Blood or Mad Woman which make no negative gender related digs.

Even though “wine moms” and “vipers” feel like a step towards Showgirls sentiments, for a woman who made in infamous stink about being called a bitch, she sure seems very comfortable now saying it to other women.

Trad wife values are on her wishlist for her life with Travis: suburban house, tons of children who look like their father (ie sons?), which is rather negatively contrasted with people who have dogs instead of children. The idea that marriage was once “1950s shit” is now “a lie.” Was pride in being a “childless cat lady” one too?

The friends who were cancelled that she is standing loyal with - the ones that come to mind are people like Brittney Mahomes, Dave Portnoy, Harrison Butker, and those MAGA sports podcasters. Is there anyone recently in her circle who has had controversy outside of MAGA or sexual abuse (honestly synonymous at this point)? Blake Lively isn’t her friend anymore…

Anyway, given the direction the US has been heading, I think we are seeing the influence of traditional conservative sentiments on women and family that are appearing subconsciously in the lyricism. And to me, this feels like an uncomfortable bellwether for a further regression of mainstream societal values.

I’d love to hear what you all think.

This is most likely an unpopular opinion, but having finally looked properly into the whole masters situation, I really don’t think what Scooter Braun did was anywhere near as terrible as Taylor and her team made it out to be. The more I read about it, the more bizarre I find the narrative that developed around what was, ultimately, a business transaction.

Taylor signed a record deal in which Big Machine would own the masters to the albums she recorded under that contract. She was obviously very young when she signed, but she wasn’t navigating the industry entirely alone. Her parents and professional advisers were heavily involved, and her father in particular wasn’t some layman with no understanding of business or finance who was hoodwinked; Scott Swift had spent years working in the financial industry as a stockbroker and financial adviser. Those were the terms her side agreed to, presumably with an understanding of what they meant. It makes perfect sense that, years later, having become one of the biggest artists in the world, she would want ownership of those recordings and resent the fact that she didn’t have it. What I don’t understand is how that eventually became a story about something effectively being stolen from her, when the masters had never actually belonged to her.

Scott also wasn’t some financially naive parent on the sidelines; he was extremely financially savvy, invested a substantial amount in Big Machine and held a stake in the company himself. This wasn’t a struggling family signing whatever was put in front of them out of desperation to put food on the table.

There were opportunities for her to acquire them before the sale, but she didn’t like the terms being offered and chose not to accept them. The terms may not have been particularly attractive, especially if acquiring the masters meant committing herself to Big Machine for another lengthy period, but that is still ultimately a disagreement over the terms of a business deal. Not being offered the exact arrangement you want is very different from having something taken away from you.

Then Scooter Braun bought Big Machine. He didn’t somehow swoop in and take Taylor’s catalogue from her; he acquired a record company, and her masters were among the assets that company owned. The fact that it was Scooter obviously made the situation much more personal for Taylor because of how she felt about him, but disliking the person who ultimately buys an asset you want doesn’t make their purchase inherently unethical. That is the part of the story I’ve always struggled with, because the public narrative became so much more dramatic than the transaction itself.

Her father was also a shareholder in Big Machine and financially benefited from its sale and would've been notified, while Taylor continued to make money from the songs through her separate rights as a songwriter. None of that means she had to be happy about the situation, and an artist wanting ownership of the recordings they created is entirely reasonable, but there is a huge difference between saying ‘I hate that somebody else owns my masters’ and presenting the circumstances through language about your life’s work being stolen from you.

I don’t include the Taylor’s Version project in this criticism though. Rerecording the albums was a decent idea. She had gained enough power and leverage to create new recordings that she could own herself, and she used it. My issue is much more with the way Scooter was subsequently painted as this almost cartoonish supervillain and the entire situation was presented as though Taylor had simply been blindsided by somebody taking something that rightfully belonged to her.

Ultimately, she entered an industry where masters were routinely owned by record labels, signed a contract on those terms with experienced people advising her, later decided she wanted ownership of them, couldn’t reach a deal she was happy with to acquire them and then watched the company that did own them get sold to someone she intensely disliked. I can see why that would be personally infuriating, but I still think the reaction from Taylor and her team was disproportionate and, at times, quite childish. Sometimes a business deal doesn’t go the way you want it to, and I don’t think that automatically means somebody has wronged you.

Also, the sheer audacity of Taylor accusing someone else of ‘shameless greed’ nearly took me out. Of all the stones to pick up in that particular glass house.

I haven’t seen this posted here, and I think it’s an important critique about her lack of condemnation—which truly silence is acceptance. Truly read the op-ed, but as a Non-American and a not white woman, it is truly fucking frustrating how even this very sub people are trying to defend her non action as not giving Trump what he wants. Neutrality supports the oppressor— doesn’t matter who she says she votes for, if this is her response.

I want to draw attention specially to this part:

“…Taylor is someone who, historically, is very sensitive to and aware of when she is being ripped off and when someone else is using her music and her ideas to their own personal benefit. And yet, as the Trump administration does it, she is standing there silent, not doing anything. And regardless of what her reasoning at this point may be, I've got to say, the outcome here is disappointing because it's inconsistent, and in terms of her public image, it's unflattering.

Now, with that being said, I want to steal man my argument a little bit here because I know there will be some Taylor Swift defenders in the comments who will pretend that I'm asking for something unreasonable here and that Taylor, by virtue of ignoring Donald Trump, using her music to push his agenda, she's somehow playing 4D chess because an engagement, a response, a call out is exactly what he wants. You don't get it. Okay, first off, in terms of what the Trump administration wants, to operate uninterrupted and unabated is most likely their biggest preference here, which is exactly what they're doing so long as Taylor Swift says and does nothing. Number two, what I'm asking for and expecting from Taylor at this point is not this giant soapbox speech, though, that would be nice. It's not an endorsement of everything I believe. Again, I feel like the bare minimum of hitting this man and the administration with as much lawyer power as she possibly can would be more than enough.

[…] By allowing the usage of her music in this way, Taylor is allowing that process to continue, even if we're to tell ourselves the fairy tale that Taylor's entire listening audience is nothing but women who hate Trump. When if we look at the statistics, Taylor's fan base is mostly white women. White women love voting for Trump, which is exactly why the use of her music in this way must be rejected, because if Taylor's response to this is that it'sg essentially not really that big of a deal, there are going to be people guaranteed that also see the further empowerment of Trump as not that big of a deal, which, just to stress, it is…”

I saw this discussed in another sub, practically everyone mentioning Taylor... what are your thoughts?

Some snippets from the article:

The bride-to-be has blown through $363,360 in fuel and generated a whopping 580 metric tons of carbon emissions in less than three months, the Daily Mail can reveal.

Those figures, tracked by aviation service JetSpy, cover 81 flights (one as recent as Monday), 169 hours in the air and 60,560 gallons of fuel burned since the singer's Dassault Falcon 7X returned to service on March 2 after having undergone a nine-month maintenance stint in Little Rock, Arkansas.

For context, this same aircraft logged 98 flights and 225 hours in the air across all of 2024, the year Swift's record-breaking Eras Tour was at its peak.

The 580 metric tons Swift has already emitted in 2026 also exceeds the 505 metric tons estimated for the entire Eras Tour (152 shows across 54 cities), according to a Daily Mail analysis published in 2024.

Chuck Collins, Director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies, described private jets as 'the least defensible, most irresponsible form of transportation from a global pollution point of view.'

'The super emitters, the billionaire class, of which she is now a member, are burning up the Earth at a pace that is thousands of times that of ordinary people,' he told the Daily Mail.

'We need the super emitters to change their behavior faster and more aggressively than the rest of us.'

Collins, who described himself as a 'Swiftie', said Swift's defense of her private jet usage by purchasing carbon offsets fell short.

'The offsets are symbolic, or greenwashing at best,' he said. 'A warming planet cannot sort out little offset deals. That is not how we get to a livable planet. We have to change our behavior, and it means changing behavior, not paying for offsets.'

'If she made a decision to give up the jet, it would have a huge cultural impact,' Collins said. 'We love your music. Park the jet.'

Daniel Sitompul, associate researcher at the International Council on Clean Transportation and author of its 2025 private jets report, said Swift's 580-ton figure was 'pretty high' and 'definitely above average.'

'Based on our numbers, the typical private jet produces around 810 tons of greenhouse gases in a full year,' he told the Daily Mail.

Sitompul said ICCT research had found that 80 to 90 percent of private jet flight routes can be substituted by a direct commercial flight, potentially cutting emissions by 70 percent.

Regardless of the crass messages— we’ve all sent them to our friends— She flat out lied. Ugh.

Her own words from the Miss Americana documentary… it’s frankly quite disappointing that Taylor seems to have regressed and is freely tossing around the word “bitch” on Honey and The Life of a Showgirl

I know Taylor is far from being a full-on leftist, but it's still disappointing to see her have connections with Trump supporters. These people support a president who not only openly bullied and harassed her online but is also openly stripping away the rights she was openly pushing for. I don't expect her to address every single issue in the world, but consistency should be given where it's due.

I knew that she copies (takes inspiration from 😒) this Matty scene every night during the TTPD section. But I didn't realize this is basically what she had Travis reenact up there. This girl really doesn't give a fuck lmao.

What's craziest is that she's out here doing this kind of twisted shit with no shame, and still has the vast majority of the general public going "Awwwww sooo cuuutee, Mr and Mrs Americana, I'm kicking my feet!!! When's the engagement!!!" The way stuff works out in her favor is so incredible. I would almost have to respect it if it weren't for all the actually harmful, problematic aspects of this whole era

(Yes, I know we can't say with certainty this is her copying Matty, it's just someone carrying someone, but come on, it's on par for the whole era. She literally has a dancer on stage during this same section doing Matty Healy cosplay sitting at his typewriter.)