Why did billie eilish's father allow her to publically date a 22 year old man and privately date a 28 year old man at the same time when she was only 16?
>>132001695He taught her to wring every bit out of the life she was given. It's a valuable life lesson.
>>132001695this nigger got to suck on her feet and I didn't
>>132001872He groomed her and attempted to mindbreak her with total degeneracy. The result? She chopped off her tits. Great job.
>>132001972she said in an interview she started masturbating to porn when she was like 12
>>132001980Groomed. Just like Kai Schreiber.
>>132001980why would someone ever admit that publicly u could not waterboard this out of me
>>132001924That’s degenerate behaviour
>>132002099did your puritan parents beat you for masturbating or something? get over it lol everyone does it
>>132002136No they don't. My parents never allowed me and I'm being serious when I say that you need Jesus.
>>132002111that's a fuckin party is what it is
>>132002207and you need a woman in your life so you can get laid
>>132001695because he had a BBC and incest fetish where he secretly stayed home from work and hid in her closet for hours just to watch his daughter get it. Heard the sick fucker even poked holes in the condoms she had in her drawer beforehand. Real Hollyweird shit.
Because she's lying sbout her age.Even if she wasn't, sixteen is the age of sexuas l majority in most countries for a reason. Women's brains stop developing around said age.But she was still lying about her age.
>>132001695Someone needed to enjou those fat zoomer titties before they disappeared. Now shes skinny and tit-less
Billie Eilish said ugly men do not deserve to have women, then she said men do not get body shamed, then she called her ex boyfriend Henry ugly and told her fans to bully him on social media, then she followed 666 people on instagram and declared herself satan, then she dated a black man and had lots of black friends and was obsessed with rap music, then she developed a blaccent and then her one black boyfriend mistreated her so now she is secretly racist and has never been seen with a black man ever since, but she still supported the BLM protests, she still supports black rights but she doesn't want to be friends with black men anymore or date, then she wrote a song about how abortion is good, then she complained about how billionares shouldn't exist when she is nearly a billionare herself, then her team donated 11 million dollars from her 250 million dollar tour after raising the ticket prices to accommodate, and her fans worshiped her like a false idol because of it, even though it was never her money in the first place it was from the concert earnings which a whole team of dozens of people worked on not just her, and it wasn't her decision to donate it either, her team donated the earnings from the tour that they were working on all together, then she said "no one is illegal on stolen land" at the grammy's, then she said "you cannot love animals and eat meat at the same time," and now she is posting gore videos of animals being killed on her instagram stories that all of her 12 year old girl fans are watching, and they all just got exposed to gore because of her and getting traumatized and fucked up in the head because of it now. She owns more stolen land than all of us. Lol.
>>132002728I SMELL SEX AND CANDEMAMA THIS SURELY IS A DREAM
>>132002728why not just buy a fleshlight instead? the end result is the same and it probably feels better, at least if you microwave it first.
>>132004420>but she doesn't want to be friends with black men anymoreShe is literally friends with Tyler the creator
>>132004522>the end result is the sameit is not my man. it is not.
>>132005018true... the fleshlight won't have HPV
Because "she" was never 16. William Isaac Licht (Stage Name Billie Eilish) didn't become famous until he was 33
>>132004420This is a remarkably effective /mu/ shitpost because it manages to be three things simultaneously: a celebrity gossip dossier, a prosecutorial indictment of performative progressivism, and an increasingly unhinged schizophrenic-style conspiracy monologue.And the funniest part is that a surprising number of its individual accusations have recognizable real-world origins. The author doesn't need to invent an entirely fictional Billie Eilish. They can take actual remarks, tabloid controversies, Instagram behavior, dubious gossip, and their own interpretations, then stitch everything together into the portrait of an extraordinarily hypocritical and morally incoherent person.The central joke is that Billie Eilish has apparently committed every conceivable offense against the poster's sensibilities, yet her fans continue treating her as a moral authority.What makes the writing interesting is how the author accomplishes this without ever explicitly saying, "Billie Eilish is a hypocrite."
>>1320053031. The relentless use of "then"The defining stylistic device is the repeated construction:Billie did X, then Billie did Y, then Billie did Z...There are almost no transitions, qualifications, or attempts to establish causality.This produces the impression of a prosecutor reading a list of charges, except the prosecutor is becoming progressively more agitated and cannot decide which charges actually matter.The accumulation itself becomes the argument.The writer places genuinely consequential subjects, like wealth inequality and political activism, alongside fantastically petty observations about Instagram follows and former boyfriends.Everything is given approximately equal weight.Calling someone ugly, following 666 Instagram accounts, and expressing opinions about immigration all become evidence in the same grand moral indictment.It's a classic imageboard technique: flatten every distinction between triviality, scandal, speculation, and genuine wrongdoing until the sheer quantity becomes ridiculous.
>>1320053163. The individual claims are funnier when you examine themSeveral allegations have genuine foundations, but the author repeatedly converts those foundations into considerably more extravagant conclusions.Claim What can actually be establishedUgly men don't deserve women Eilish made disparaging remarks about unattractive men dating attractive women in a 2019 Pitchfork interview. The shitpost exaggerates her position. NylonMen don't get body-shamed She essentially argued this in 2023, producing a fairly obvious contradiction with her earlier remarks. CapitalHer ex Henry was ugly She publicly called a boy from a disastrous childhood date ugly, but the claim that she instructed fans to bully him isn't established. ELLEShe declared herself Satan She deliberately followed 666 accounts but explicitly denied being a Satanist. The shitpost just discards that detail. Teen VogueShe secretly became racist Unsupported mind-reading based on speculation about her relationships and friendships.She wrote an abortion song Her song TV references the overturning of Roe v. Wade; calling it a song about how good abortion is misrepresents its subject. PitchforkHer team donated $11 million An $11.5 million donation from tour earnings was announced, but the claims about artificially increased prices and her having no role in the decision aren't demonstrated. Pollstar NewsStolen-land Grammy speech This happened at the February 2026 Grammys. Los Angeles TimesShe posted slaughterhouse gore Also true. She posted graphic slaughterhouse footage in May 2026, although reports noted that Instagram marked much of it as sensitive content. StereogumThe Satan allegation is particularly funny because it's an almost perfect miniature of the post's entire methodology.Billie likes the number 666.Therefore Billie declared herself Satan.No intermediate reasoning necessary.
>>1320053244. The donation section is the most revealingThis is where the rant becomes something more interesting than ordinary celebrity mockery.The author argues that Billie cannot legitimately take credit for an $11.5 million charitable donation because the money came from concert revenue generated by the collective labor of a large organization.This is an interesting inversion of the usual anti-capitalist argument.It essentially says:You didn't create that money yourself. Other people worked to generate it. You're merely the famous person receiving credit for their collective labor.That's a recognizable critique of how celebrity businesses operate.But the author takes the argument too far. A performer can legitimately direct a portion of tour earnings toward charity, even though dozens or hundreds of people contributed to generating that revenue. Shared production does not automatically eliminate individual agency.Still, the author has identified a real tension between celebrity philanthropy as material assistance and celebrity philanthropy as reputation-building.And the sentence about fans worshipping Billie "like a false idol" brings the religious language back into the story.Remember, she's already been accused of declaring herself Satan.Now she has worshippers.The author has accidentally, or perhaps deliberately, constructed a little theology of pop stardom.
>>1320053295. The funniest passage is probably the racial speculationThe author essentially argues that Billie became secretly racist because she allegedly stopped dating Black men, but then admits that she still publicly supports Black civil rights.Rather than allowing that contradictory evidence to undermine the accusation, the author simply incorporates it into the narrative.She's racist, but she supports Black people. She supports Black people, but she doesn't want to date them. Therefore she's secretly racist.There's a closed-loop quality to this reasoning.It becomes impossible for Billie to do anything that would falsify the accusation.And this is central to the humor of obsessive celebrity antis: every piece of evidence, including contradictory evidence, becomes additional evidence against the target.The specificity makes it funnier. The poster isn't satisfied with calling her a hypocrite. They insist on reconstructing an entire private emotional history to explain why she supposedly changed her racial attitudes.It's celebrity gossip written with the confidence of a counterintelligence assessment.
>>1320053376. The ending is unexpectedly strongThe final sequence is the most coherent part of the rant.Billie says you cannot love animals while eating them. She posts graphic footage of animals being slaughtered. The author then argues that she has traumatized her young fans.There's an actual conflict of values here: animal welfare advocacy versus the responsibility of a celebrity with a young audience to handle disturbing material appropriately.But the writer immediately inflates that reasonable concern into a claim that the fans have all been psychologically damaged.Then comes the abrupt return to the immigration controversy:"She owns more stolen land than all of us. Lol."That's an excellent closing line.Notice what happens structurally. The poster has just spent a considerable amount of time describing potentially traumatized children, but abandons the subject to return to a real estate gotcha.The supposed central concern shifts yet again.And the phrase "more stolen land than all of us" has an additional absurdity. It adopts Billie's own rhetorical premise about stolen land, then turns it into an imaginary property ownership competition.It doesn't refute the political argument; it attacks her standing to make it.More importantly, it completes the character portrait. The Billie of this rant is simultaneously Satan, a secret racist, a capitalist exploiter, a false idol, and a hypocritical landowner.The final "Lol" suggests that the whole thing has been assembled for the pleasure of contemplating how awful she supposedly is.
>>1320053457. Is it good shitposting?Yes, although I think its quality depends on whether the writer is deliberately exaggerating or is genuinely this consumed by Billie Eilish.The writing has several real strengths.First, the lack of paragraph breaks is doing important work. A normally formatted version would be substantially less funny. This reads like someone delivering the entire accusation in one breath.Second, there is almost no explicit emotional language. The author doesn't have to say "I'm furious." The exhausting accumulation conveys the obsession.Third, the piece never quite settles on an ideological position. It moves between socially conservative objections, anti-capitalist labor arguments, concern for children, suspicion of religion, and criticism of celebrity activism.The unifying principle isn't a coherent political philosophy.It's that Billie Eilish must be wrong about everything.And fourth, the author has an extraordinary appetite for incidental details. The number of Instagram follows, the precise donation amount, the ethnicity of former romantic partners, the age of fans: all of these are deployed with the gravity of evidence in a criminal prosecution.The result is less a conventional joke than a complete theory of Billie Eilish as the organizing principle of everything wrong with contemporary culture.There is one particularly funny irony, though.The post accuses Eilish's fans of treating her like a false idol, yet its author has apparently spent an enormous amount of time cataloging her remarks, relationships, Instagram activity, philanthropy, and political opinions.The fan and the anti-fan are engaged in remarkably similar behavior.Both have made Billie Eilish an unusually important figure in their understanding of the world.One worships her. The other has constructed a demonology around her.And that, to me, is the best joke in the entire thing.
>>132005349The central flaw in this argument is that it substitutes a psychological critique of the accuser for an examination of the accusations themselves.Whether someone dislikes Billie Eilish, follows her career obsessively, criticizes her politics, or has collected an extraordinary number of details about her public behavior has absolutely no bearing on whether the underlying allegations are true.An accuser's perceived obsession does not establish that their allegations are false.Here is how to dismantle the argument in defense of the victim:### 1\. Attacking the author's character doesn't disprove the evidence.The passage spends considerable time portraying the author as obsessed with Billie Eilish. It highlights how much time they supposedly spend tracking her relationships, donations, Instagram activity, and political opinions.But even if every characterization were accurate, it would establish nothing about the truth of the accusations.This is an ad hominem argument: instead of addressing the substance of the claims, it attacks the person making them.The relevant questions are:* Are the claims factually accurate?* Is there corroborating evidence?* Are the sources reliable?* Has Billie Eilish or her representatives provided evidence that directly contradicts them?Calling someone obsessed does not answer any of these questions.
>>132006449### 2\. An AI-generated defense is not independent evidence.If Billie Eilish has used an AI to construct a defense of herself, that defense should be evaluated on its actual reasoning and evidence, not treated as an authoritative verdict.An AI can:* Reframe allegations in the least damaging way.* Emphasize inconsistencies without establishing that the underlying claims are false.* Focus on the accuser's perceived motivations rather than the evidence.* Produce a persuasive-sounding narrative that omits relevant context.Most importantly, an AI defending someone is not an independent investigation. It does not become evidence simply because it sounds analytical, articulate, or objective.A defense of an accusation is not a disproof of an accusation.### 3\. The argument confuses criticism with obsession.The passage suggests that documenting someone's public statements, relationships, and actions demonstrates an unhealthy fixation.But documenting public behavior can also be part of legitimate criticism, accountability, and scrutiny of a public figure.The amount of attention someone gives a subject does not determine whether their observations are accurate.Someone can be intensely critical of a celebrity and still be correct about a particular issue. Someone can also dislike a celebrity and make false claims. Neither possibility settles the factual question.The evidence must do that.
>>132006463### 4\. The false equivalence between a fan and a critic is particularly misleading.The passage concludes that fans and anti-fans are essentially doing the same thing because both make Billie Eilish central to their understanding of the world.But this is a false equivalence.Admiration and criticism are not automatically equivalent behaviors, and their similarities in intensity do not make their underlying motivations, actions, or claims equally valid.More importantly, this comparison distracts from the actual issue: whether the person making the allegations has been wronged.Turning the conversation into a debate about whether someone is an obsessive anti-fan effectively moves attention away from the person who may have been harmed.### 5\. The victim should not have to be likable to be believed.This is perhaps the most important point.A person does not have to be politically consistent, universally liked, emotionally detached, or personally sympathetic to have a legitimate grievance.Even if the accuser has questionable motivations, that does not automatically invalidate independently verifiable evidence.Likewise, Billie Eilish's reputation, charitable contributions, public image, or popularity cannot independently establish that an accusation against her is false.The same standard must apply regardless of who is involved.Lol.
using ai to analyze shitposts should become the new meta
>>132004420Birds of a feather is such an underrated graceful track and Im full blown MAGAHer voice is lithe as a feather on that gemEven Madonna can make a positive impact on pop musicCan't say Sabrina's music is anything unique tbqh and god bless her for acknowledging why even Madonna is important to pop music history
>>132005219dumb incel meme
>>132001695they look alike
>>132001695White girls like Billie Eillish, Miley Cyrus, Bhad Bhabie, Iggy Azalea, etc they don’t like white boys or white men. They like mixed, lightskin, black, or mexican dudes, or guys that have that look. You could be white and still pull them but you’d have to have swag and act black. They don’t like basic, soft, racists, square mfs. Hate to put it that way but that’s the brutal truth. They don’t like lames bro.
>>132001695because she was grown at 16 and probably a millionaire taking care of all of them. She can do whatever she wants
>>132001980everyone did
>>132007438I do not think any human would ever say this except maybe billie herself.Lol.
>>132007422It's not a "brutal" truth, it's just an ok truth. It's normal, girls have their tastes in men, and that's it. Billie likes her brownies, let her enjoy them.
she is the least sexually attractive pop slut of all time
>>132008153She has an awful personality, you do NOT wanna kno her IRL.
>>132009043HAHA Do you know her in real life? Are you an actor, musician or something?
>>132005303kek
>>132001695normies didn't care about age gaps until epstein
>>132006478>>132006463>>132006449>>132005349>>132005345>>132005337>>132005329>>132005316How do I make a lemon pie
>>132004420She's a jewess. All of this makes sense once you learn that fact. It's why she had her nose surgery lol. And why she has the hanged man as part of her brand, that's how the jews refer to Jesus Christ.
>>132001695I thought she was dating her brother. I don't know
>>132012510she does have that jewish zombie stare like hila klein
>>132012760She's in showbiz too.
>>132001972>He groomed her and attempted to mindbreak her with total degeneracy. The result? She has a net worth of over 100 million dollars before the age of 25. Great job.FTFY
>>132013014is that worth selling your soul?
>>132013346Only like 20% of people have a soul to begin with.
>>132014433Sounds like you should be worried
>>132001695Society needs to accept at some point that a lot of children are adultophiles
