• johnny_deadeyes@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I wish they would maybe capitalize the proper nouns in this post. On first readings, not knowing Astronomer is the name of a corporation, I thought they were just referring to a CEO that also happened to be an avid stargazer -“What a strange detail to include…”.

  • fne8w2ah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 hours ago

    And they would have likely gotten away with it, if it wasn’t for that pesky kisscam.

    • bus_factor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Might have also gotten away with it if they didn’t completely freak out in front of the kiss cam, so everyone started thinking they were cheating and looked into who they were.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        This. Entirely this.

        If they had just gone “woo hoo we’re on the TV thing at a concert! Woohoo” … Like everyone expected them to, then nobody would have given a shit.

        They’re just people having fun at a concert.

        Meanwhile, they freaked the fuck out, the guys on stage pointed it out, and everyone went full Psycho trying to figure out what was going on. And now they’re in the daily dose of Internet.

        GG guys. Ĝis poste

  • Wren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    I don’t get it…

    Is he an astronomer? Or is that the name of his company? Seriously, who here had ever even heard of him, or his company prior to this?

    Yet somehow this is now major news? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s news because it’s fucking hilarious. The clip is funny even without knowing it’s a corporate scandal. But the context makes it even juicier.

    • TeddE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Excellent point. There’s a certain ‘sacrificial lamb’ vibe to this. With everything going on right now, how is this worth anyone’s time?

      I’m not the biggest Coldplay fan, so let me extrapolate: if tomorrow we learned Weird Al Yankovic’s mother liked to kick puppies that would certainly be odd, definitely not good news. But I’d still think having Trump not releasing the Epstein files is a matter far more worth our attention.

  • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    13 hours ago

    There is only 1 CEO I have seen hit the ground faster than that, I don’t think I am beeing too harsh.

    • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Because it’s brainrot, notice the focus is on the CEO & not on the lady (as in equal focus)

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      81
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s ragebait for people who think porking rights should be exclusive by default. And by that I mean nasty horrible idiots. Abolish marriage!

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Toxic polyamory is just as bad as toxic monogamy. If people want to be exclusive they should be exclusive. If your partner wants to be exclusive and you don’t, and you choose to cheat, you’re still a piece of shit.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Uhhh, if you don’t like marriage, how about don’t get married?! This isn’t rocket science… They both got married. They both signed the social contract that by default means exclusivity, regardless of what you think.

        Judging by how they reacted, they also understood their marriages to be assumed exclusivity, and clearly did not discuss open terms with their spouse. So basically… get some logic skills because your opinion on marriage is irrelevant here.

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Even married, you can have an honest discussion with your spouse about seeing other people (preferably before you get married), then just tell them you’re going to see Coleplay with your work girlfriend. Like it’s not illegal, and it’s not even wrong unless you make it wrong by being a shady little shit about it.

          Just like fuckin… talk to each other about your feelings. God.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            I love how you’re being downvoted for stating the most obvious solution. TIL certain lemmings don’t believe in healthy communication.

          • LousyCornMuffins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 hours ago

            My besties have been in an open relationship for years and it works because of communication, trust, and trying to deserve said trust.

              • webadict@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                15 hours ago

                There’s no technicality about it. The people that get married are the ones who determine the exclusivity of the marriage.

                Like, it’s even dumber than that because if you didn’t have marriage, you’d still have people in exclusive relationships, so wtf are you complaining about?

              • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                14 hours ago

                I understand how shitty conservative social norms are to those repressed by them, but this usage of marriage as an example is… rather ridiculous.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          15 hours ago

          that’s brain rot thinking, you know that’s just the default and instance and therefore cannot mean anything that you think it does This is the kind of generalization behind a lot of evil in the world

          • TimeNaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            It’s an echochamber with all dissent being suppressed. The way you write shows you’re deeply stuck in it.

            • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              14 hours ago

              I just expressed a maximally dissenting opinion on marriage and yet, the message still stands … Who are those dissenters that you imagine are getting suppressed on whatever that server is?

            • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              15 hours ago

              But I"m not “there” to me the local tab is meaningless, I don’t even know on what server we are having this discussion besides “the lemmiverse” So stop it with the digital provincialism !

      • piefood@feddit.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        I’m all for people being able to bone other consenting adults, married or not, but these two clearly think that cheating is bad. If they had open relationships, then why would they care if they were seen together?

  • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Old people pretending sex is still so fun at that age it’s worth losing everything over will never not be funny to me.

    • buttnugget@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Aside from the fact that plenty of people still have sex as they get older, it doesn’t exactly look like they’re just having a random physical affair, does it?

    • YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Eh, sex is as fun as you make it. If you vibe with the other person it’s usually a better time. I think these two just have a connection they have been missing out on with their current partners. Also marriage is a scam anyways. If you really want to commit to someone, you shouldn’t need the threat of financial ruin to keep that promise.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I really hate their friends in the video. They’re all aware their friends are piece of shit cheaters, and they find it funny. “Haha we’re taking part in destroying a woman’s life by helping her husband cheat, hilarious!”

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      19 hours ago

      That’s the CEO and CPO, not her friends. She was recently promoted, possibly related to things like this

      She’s making tens of thousands more per year to be complicit. I’ve seen people do much worse for much less money

    • Alaik@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I mean theyre both married. Not sure why you’re focusing on just the one piece of shit.

      • hactar42@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        17 hours ago

        In balance of power. Since he is the CEO he holds a position of authority over her. She could very well be in a position where she fearful of retaliation if she doesn’t except his advances. I’m not saying that’s the case here, but there is a chance it could be.

        • Alaik@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          16 hours ago

          If my boss came on to me, I’m still not betraying my wife. I’ll definitely collect evidence for a law suit though.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      18 hours ago

      People who think ducking other people and require porking excludivity rights and that violating that egregious agreement is to be understood as “cheating” and that jt “destroys your life” are THE PROBLEM. Big capital P PROBLEM and please all of you duck off into the Sun already you medieval, knuckle-dragging, fairy tale believing, immature, uptight, toxic, purita-totalitarian, well poisonning, abscess-filled, fun preventers and your ball breaking accomplices!

      • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        18 hours ago

        “Cheating” isn’t just violating “porking exclusivity rights”, it’s breaking whatever the commitments and promises you have made to others within that relationship.

        I agree completely that the institutions of marriage and default of hard monogamy are a “Big capital P PROBLEM”, but only because it prevents thinking and talking about what those commitments should be between the individuals within those relationships. Which inevitably ends up causing harm because it allows for the incredibly immature stance of “all relationships should be {like this}” without considering the wants and needs of those involved.

        The problem with the couple above is that they are clearly, and publicly, being caught in the act of breaking the terms of some such personal agreement, however unspoken, and that makes one or both of them a lying, two face, cowardly, immature, piece of shit regardless of any overarching discussion about monogamy, but what else should you expect from a CEO?

        The key takeaway is that your message will not land with anyone and will be counterproductive because you are conflating being a dishonest douchenozzle with general non-monogamy and people will resent you and your underlying message, however valid, because of it.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          15 hours ago

          like no wonder so many married people are unhappy, even people I know personnally think this “sucks but is convenient” wow, that ducking blow

          • LousyCornMuffins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 hours ago

            That’s weird, you must be meeting drastically different people than me because most of my social circles are happy in their relationships.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I couldn’t phrase it that constructively while also just “letting it out” I"m not trying to convince anyone just finding why I am so irked/annoyed at people calling the guy’s main being “their life destroyed” by a fucking hug, as if they knew anything about their relationship, they’re just assumed of course in their worldview that’s “being destroyed”, like wow, I don’t want anything to do with any of that crap worldview !

          • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            If it was just a fucking hug or just this photo then I’d 100% agree with you, but watch the video that has been linked in this thread, they’re — not subtle. It’s such a grossly over the top “hand in the cookie jar” type moment.

            Also you make a good point about the “the guy’s main being “their life destroyed”” being an absolute shit worldview. I get sometimes just needing to vent, but you do understand the consequences and harms of this being your method of release right?

    • misty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      42
      ·
      22 hours ago

      What’s wrong with that? Of course they will side with their friends. If my friend is scheming and shares with me, I’m in! Being partners in crime is such a strong bonding experience.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Not if the friend is wrong. If they’re really wrong then, I’ll try to talk them out of it. If they’re really really wrong, then I’ll stop being their friend.

        I don’t like this kind of in-group/out-group clannish mentality – that “right” is whatever the in-group decides, with no greater thought to what’s like actually the best thing for everyone, whether they’re in the group or not.

          • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Yeah those people can take a while to sniff out. It’s difficult when someone is kind and generous with you, maybe even protective, but they lack empathy towards people who they consider outside of their very small kindness bubble.

            Actually reminds me of this old article (checks date, wow, really old). Kind of related to Dunbar’s number. It’s pretty intuitive, but still some good reading.

      • ssɐqɯnᗡ@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        22 hours ago

        So, you’d help your friend cheat on their partner and still feel comfortable trusting them?