Women, as usual, made better records and were ignored

>Women, as usual, made better records and were ignored.
It's hard to believe anyone still takes Pitchfork seriously

Queercore isn't a real genre of music

jesus that website is a joke

>that article is an actually existing thing that a human being put there work into
is this a meme?

They just change their opinions to suit the market. At the moment they know they appeal to faggy nu-male hipsters so they gear everything they write towards them. If tomorrow the fashion became battle jackets and skullets their opinions would quickly change to suit gruff metalheads.

Is "jesse dorris" a woman?

You realise this is a person who has years of experience in that scene talking about those experiences in a candid, open, unacademic manner, right?

I have never jumped to defend Shitfork, but the people here overreact to every single thing they do.

you can stare at a bag of dog shit for 5 years and its still going to be dog shit

And had this exact piece been published else where not a soul here would care; they're more concerned with Pitchfork as a brand/entity than the quality of their content.

Pretty sure they do it to annoy snowflakes

But it is the snowflakes who use that label, though.

Well in my experience the only people annoyed by proud queer dudes are closted themselves

You can tell how culturally bankrupt the left has gotten because the terms they made up with complete sincerity like safe space and triggerd got mocked so hard even they now think they can turn around and accuse people of being snowflakes even though the past few years was nothing but liberals accusing a ham sandwich of being racist and other absurdities

People who get triggered by "them queers" and push their otherness as obnoxious are just right-wing snowflakes.

They've always been liberal but they've pretty much turned into BuzzFeed over the past couple years. Sad.

It's fine that you don't know the meanings or origins of those terms, but it's not fine that you equate mockery with invalidation while bolstering this ignorance with nothing.

This is definitely true, though.

>word salad to make me feel better about the fact that the poster I'm responding to just absolutely rekd my world view

If you thought that was word salad you could well have a sub 100 iq

Female punk is the cringiest shit I've ever heard.

Gay punk can be pretty provocative though... I'm ambivalent on that. They tend to be SUPER fucking degenerate and that's fucking punk as fuck.

>but the people here overreact to every single thing they do.
Seeing P4k go from what they used to be pre MBDTF is depressing.
The industry killed pitchfork.

I liked it when they did reviews of Jet summarising an album with a vid of a monkey pissing into his mouth.
I want old p4k back ;_;

The Raincoats are fucking great though

That's because pitchfork is influential. Nobody gives a fuck about what's said on tinymixtapes but pitchfork can ruin a career with a stupid review.

Quick history lesson:

"Triggered" is a term that has been used as a psychological term for decades. The way it started with the left's recent politicisation of the term relates to PTSD, and how certain things can trigger people with PTSD. Of course members of the left took to overusing the term because it became trendy and the meaning was quickly obfuscated. Equally stupid and zealous conservatives and libertarians took the word and began using it as an insult whenever somebody disagreed with them in discourse. And then the left reappropriated it to do the same.

"Safe spaces" are places that emotionally vulnerable people can seek some asylum or respite from an environment generally uncaring of their problems. This group of people includes, but is not limited to: survivors of rape and incest, soldiers with "unseen wounds", schizophrenic people, and those with longterm cases of physical and mental bullying. Once again, members of the left - in their zeal - took to applying safe spaces to every environment and bastardising them in the process. Morons on the opposite end of the playing field took this to mean that their opponents are all mentally weak or sissified by liberal groupthink. It was then reappropriated by the left to mock people quick to flock to echo chambres to voice their opinions.

There are very specific meanings to these words that got buried by dogma on both sides. Even as a really progressive/liberal man, I've come to loathe a lot of things about leftist politics. So don't mistake my rant for being one born of misguided lefty defensiveness. I'm just frustrated with posts like the one I replied to above because they're an insidious continuation of the tone the left helped establish in the first place.

We need less transgenderfluidspecies gay people and more Stephen Frys.

Nah, I just mostly hate how numerous straight and bisexual White women apply the label to themselves to boost their socjus cred or justify their social failure.

It's hard to find good female punk.
Most chicks think of themselves as princesses.

The need to be more loose. Punk is about being wild.
I like a couple local gigs fronted by female singers, but they would not even be considered by the rest of the female punk audience. So they end up "selling it" a bit more to a male audience.
And that chick shreds it too.

No bullshit, just partying.

This alleged career-ruining influence has never been validated through research, and apart from a handful of negative reviews being correlated to a declining popularity of the artists they reviewed, nobody has really proved they're capable of "killing" careers. Plenty of artists they've given awful reviews to still sell records, tour, and make loads of money.

Hell, responding to them in the overzealous way people here do feeds in to that. It makes it more likely for people to visit their website, share their articles, and send ad revenue their way. Ignore them and tell other people to do so if you're worried about the influence they hold.

Eh this is a reasonable thing to be sceptical about, but I think you're reacting more to a niche group of people and not the core meaning of the word and how it accurately describes a significant amount of people.

I think that trying to limit punk’s range if expression to angry grunting is a typically male thing to do though, no?
Like what about Siouxsie, she was original and expressive as fuck, but not in a male way, so to you she’s not punk?
Seems limiting, and being limiting is the opposite of what punk was about

>limit punk’s range if expression to angry grunting
That's not what I meant.
I meant the attitude. Be sexy!
Or be the exact opposite.

Provoke.

>Be sexy!
Right. Because that's inherently "punk".

But defining punk as ‘provication’ while simultaneously saying ‘but it has to be this kind of expression’
Nah, not buying it

Punk was never so conservative

Sexy or the opposite I said.
Doesn't matter, just provoke.

Also the issue is "boring acts"

You seem pretty provoked though

As defined how though? By you?

REEEEEEEEEE STOP BEING BORING REEEEEEEEEE

Eh okay I guess. Just seems kind of arbitrary to me because punk was mostly just about not caring about what other people thought was cool or proper when the movement started. CBGB turned a bunch of weird, malnourished kids into rock stars in less than 5 years. They weren't that provocative, but they were still pretty punk ideologically speaking.

Not everybody has to sing "I AM AN ANTICHRIST" to be punk, is all I'm trying to say.

Well my taste is > than yours user

Lmao

Good for you user, now go and write that thinkpiece

What's the point in making boring music?

Like why? Why bother?
Punk evolved because rock became bland and boring.
It's about experiencing raw emotion.

I once saw a gig with a black guy screaming about his hatred of toxic masculinity.
I hated his opinion, but loved the show he had, his passion.

That's something that punk needs back.

Make some fucking records then

Television and Buzzcocks are pretty boring though.

Hope that didn't PROVOKE you too much.

Death Grips fans in a nutshell

Also, Crazium, do yourself and this board a huge favour: put on a trip and then promptly go kill yourself

I already killed myself and came back as a namefag. I'm afraid of what will happen if I succeed a second time.

thank you for a smart unbiased post on Sup Forums

If you made a band that is so safe and unprovocative - would that inadvertently become provocative in a way?
Or if you made a band that deliberately sucked in every way?

>Or if you made a band that deliberately sucked in every way?
That's exactly what the entire original punk movement was, you dumbass.

No, the original punk movement was to suck just enough to piss people off while still having basic pop structure, chords and all.

Remember Sid Vicious (or Simon Ferocious) was deemed TOO shitty a bass player for the album recording.

Another thing:
There is this whole "alt-right (it's full right in disguise)" bullshit going on, but most bands criticise their opinions.
There aren't any bands that nihilistically agree with them though, e.g.:
>why must our universe have racial differences? How cruel is that?
It's about admitting that they're correct on some subjects, but hating that fact. That's a point of view some bands should address. The horrific reality of our world.

Sup Forums spends too much time saying things, but not realising the horrible weight attached to it.
The left spends too much time denying the existence of those things.

Nobody seems to talk about the torment of the things the right says while agreeing that they occur.
"I agree with you, but that doesn't mean I like it."

Depends on the what you mean by "sucked"
I meant in a "boring" way, not in an awful dissonant unprofessional sounding way.

Boring is relative though
Like, I actually find your narrow definition of punk to be quite boring

You're boring.

no u

That could be the single worst paragraph I have ever read

How many times have you actually encountered the type of person you just described, and how many times have you found out they're closeted faggots? Be honest

>queercore
Literally never heard of this before. Also any artist who uses their homosexuality to promote their band is probably shit.

Once you understand that 99% of negative criticism is motivated by jealousy, all sorts of behaviour start to make sense

And honestly, I lost count

>99% of negative criticism is motivated by jealousy
This literally isn't true.

Oh it is
Lrn2psychology

It's something retards tell themselves as a way to ignore 99% of criticism. Also
>armchair psychology
Stop

I'm out as queer and I hate flamoyance and shitty journalism

You’re just jealous of my insight

Bravo

He was right in taking down thosw though, kiss fucking sucks

this isn't correct at all. i'm majoring in psychology could you stop getting your info from wikipedia articles!
Thank You

You gotta be retarded if you think pitchfork can ruin someone's career
The fact that Anthony Fantano has a bigger fanbase than them should tell you something

Isn't that just Captain Beefheart?

>You gotta be retarded if you think pitchfork can ruin someone's career
hows mars volta doing?

Their last pitchfork review was in 2009, the band disbanded in 2013
I don't see much influence here

Yes it is, no you’re not, no I didn’t, and you’re welcome xoxo