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…

and another good comment

[…] 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:

  • kautau@lemmy.world
    42·
    9 months ago

    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

    • Pohl@lemmy.world
      5·
      9 months ago

      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.

    • wrath_of_grunge@kbin.social
      2·
      9 months ago

      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.