Blink-182 Apparently to Feature on Posthumous XXXTentacion Album

@Jason Tate disappointing why?

 

Not that it makes it any better but hoping it's just Travis and not the band as a whole. Travis unfortunately doesn't seem to care about working with artists like this while it would be very disappointing to see Mark agreeing to do this and having his band name associated with a known abuser.

 

Is it really not obvious how I feel about these things at this point? I feel like I've been pretty clear for years now how I think bands and artists that lend their voice and platform to abusers is wrong for a large number of reasons.

 

I mean, even if it’s just Travis, Mark is still complicit for being in a band with an abuser apologist and that’s not a good look.

 

Not that I disagree with you, but does that opinion change or soften at all when the abuser is dead and therefore no longer able to (1) profit off the association or (2) parlay it into a position of further power over fans?

 

An abuser is an abuser. They shouldn’t continue to get praised and contributions from other artists just because they’re dead. That doesn’t absolve them from being shitty and that’s not a legacy people should want to continue.

 

I don't disagree with you. Unfortunate that some people don't have any morals or choose cash over them.

 

Not when all of their fans, specifically women and gay fans, have to see how little that abusive behavior apparently meant. Think of all the abuse survivors that have to see this from their favorite band and what that might mean to them.

 

Odd thought process there to say the least. Is a murderer still thought of as a murderer after they die? Lol

If your answer is yes, then this isn’t any different

 

We usually talk about deplatforming abusers under two justifications -- the moral component (not endorsing abusers) and the practical component (not placing abusers in a better position to abuse). Obviously the moral justification never goes away, but I hadn't fully considered that a practical component remains after the abuser's death as well (vis-à-vis the impact seeing an abuser's legacy validated has on the abused). That's why I asked Jason, and I'm glad to have seen his answer.

 

Why wouldn't they be?

 

We are in agreement, sorry if that wasn’t clear haha.

I was just saying a murderer is a murderer even when dead, an abuser is still an abuser even when dead

 

Wasn’t trying to be a dick or anything, just throwing my simplistic view on things in there for those like me!

 

Got it! Yes we agree. Sorry, I thought you were using that argument on the other side, haha.

 

I’m pretty sure it’s just Travis, which still doesn’t make it okay.

 

Travis already collaborated with him while he was alive so that wouldn't make it "surprising." That would also make it pretty odd for the person to go out of their way or have a mix up to say it was the band specifically.

 

Gross. Very gross

 

Booooooooo

 

Travis loves that money. He’s worked with shitty people in the past and will continue. As long as it makes his wallet bigger he doesn’t care what these guys do.

 

I glanced over his bio on Wikipedia for what it’s worth, because I know very little about him. I found this line interesting “When Onfroy was six years old, he tried to stab a man attempting to attack his mother”. It sounds like violence, rightfully used (as in self defence) or absolutely wrong (to hurt harm or intimidate and so on) was a regular part of his short life.

 

Just as long as they don't talk to his kid, then they deserve hell.

 

What does this add to the conversation, K.

Watch him ignore this but engage with every man in the thread instead ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Even if it was just Travis, mark would have had to have approved that they use the blink-182 name. Just saying.

 

Benefit of a doubt: Xxx’s manager conflated Travis with Blink. But either way, it sucks. As others have said, they don’t mind working touring with a problematic band or a XXX apologist/collaborator. They only care if someone’s done something to them personally.