Athena⁷

ot7 stan jungkook bias
BTS saved me, Now ill do everything to protect them
she/they
proud to be chocolate skin and TAMIL
21 yrs old

[정국 @koostrous]

the concept of stanning BTS and not obsessing over their private lives, their relationships, their sexuality, overanalyzing how they act, who they’re friends with, what they wear and stalking them

[SFMOMA @SFMOMA]

Tickets for RM x SFMOMA Member Previews are SOLD OUT 🫶

The countdown continues. Encore pass + general public tickets drop August 11 at 10 a.m. PT https://t.co/4mHWoGfkJ8

#RMxSFMOMA #ArtThatStaysWithYou #RM #BTS #HYBEINSIGHT

[Kel⁷ · 보라해 💜🚦 @kelxya]

Bite Me 🦇 - co-written w/ @curionenene
Yoonseok, Minjoon, Taekook

One unfortunate near-death later, Hoseok finds out a few things: One, vampires are real. Two, they don't sparkle. Three, a war is brewing and he's landed in the middle of it.

Or: AU in which Hoseok screams a lot

[BTS Charts & News @btschartsxdaily]

[NEWS] Member tickets for the #RMxSFMOMA exhibition are officially SOLD OUT! 🚨👏

[colin @colin_goldmund]

ARMYs, this is one of the most interesting and trenchant takes on BTS's Grammys decision, even digging into America's history of "Separate but Equal."

Kim Ou-joon, one of Korea's most influential public figures and its most prominent progressive voice (I recently wrote a seven-part article about him in the Articles section), devoted a lengthy segment to the BTS-Grammys controversy on his program, Gyeomson News Factory. It is the most-watched live political and current affairs program on YouTube in Korea (and in the world), drawing more than 200,000 live viewers and averaging around 1.2 million views per day.

Kim was sick last Friday, so he wasn't there to host the show when three music critics appeared and made the most misguided arguments about BTS's decision:

1. This is just a Korean inferiority complex. It may feel emotionally satisfying, but it wasn't the right decision.
2. HYBE probably realized BTS had little chance of winning a major Grammy category anyway, so they made a calculated business move before the Grammys could reject them. This is basically a power game.
3. Now that the Grammys have created an Asian Pop category, future artists may dream of winning in that category. So we can't say BTS's decision was entirely the right one.
4. Didn't BTS work so hard to learn English and Japanese in order to break into the U.S. and Japanese markets? Now that there's an Asian Pop category, artists might not have to do that anymore. They could stay in their own language and still be nominated in the Asian Pop category. Isn't that actually a good thing?

Here is Kim Ou-joon's commentary from today's show. I translated them as faithfully as possible. Because of his short, conversational style of speaking, I added a few words here and there for context so that his intended meaning would come across accurately. And I omitted the exchanges between Kim and the announcer during Kim’s commentary.
—----------------------------
“I think the Grammys created the new Asian Pop Music category because they were planning to give that award to BTS. But then BTS refused to submit their music, and it became a global controversy.

Media outlets around the world started pouring out articles. From The New York Times onward, pretty much every major international media outlet we know covered it. And, for the most part, they viewed BTS's boycott positively.

They called it "a gentle but powerful criticism" (The Guardian). “Refusing was the right thing to do” (Cosmopolitan). "A declaration of independence" (Sportal Korea). “BTS had captured the spirit of the times" (The Economic Times)

Now, last Friday, the music critics who appeared on our program seemed to say that this new category could have become a stepping stone for Asian-language music to succeed in the global market, so they felt a little disappointed by BTS's decision.

Yes, I understand that point of view. There's some validity to it. But I think differently.

If I had been there, I probably would have argued against them pretty strongly. Since I wasn't, let me add my thoughts now, even if it's a little late.

Because I don't think this is something we should just let pass. I think this is a significant event, one that deserves to be recorded not only in Korean cultural history but also in the history of world culture.

Let me briefly explain why. To understand this, we have to look at it not from our perspective, but from the Western perspective. Using their way of thinking. Because it's a Western award show. It was their decision. We have to understand why they did it from their point of view. That's how you understand their intention.

Now, there's a precedent for this. I think it was 2019. MTV became the first major music award show to create a Best K-Pop category. It should have just been called Pop. Instead, they created a separate Best K-Pop category.

At the time, The Washington Post used a particular expression. They said this was America's "separate but equal" rule in music awards.

That phrase is extremely important in the history of the American civil rights movement. For Americans, just hearing those three words is enough. They immediately understand what's being implied.

This goes back to around 1890. Louisiana was one of the places where racial discrimination was especially severe. The state passed a law requiring separate railroad cars for white people and Black people. Black and white passengers had to ride in different train cars. Civil rights activists wanted to challenge that law as unconstitutional, as racial discrimination.

At that time, there was a man named Plessy. By appearance, he looked white. But he was one-eighth Black. His great-grandmother was Black.

At the time, America had what was called the one-drop rule. If you had even one drop of Black blood, no matter how white you looked, you were legally classified as Black.

So this man boarded a whites-only train car. Then he deliberately announced that he was Black. He wanted to be arrested.

That's how the lawsuit began. The case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The Louisiana judge's name was Ferguson, so in America it's known as “Plessy v. Ferguson.”

It's a very famous case. One of the most famous rulings in American history came out of that case. That's where the phrase "separate but equal" comes from.

The Court ruled that separating railroad cars was constitutional because, although they were separated, they were supposedly equal. In the end, it was a ruling that justified racial discrimination. This was at the end of the nineteenth century.

After that decision, segregation spread far beyond railroad cars. Because racial segregation had now been accepted under the Constitution, separation spread into every part of society. Schools. Hospitals. Parks. Buses. Theaters. Restrooms. Eventually even cemeteries. People were separated from birth until death.

But the facilities for Black people received less than one-tenth of the funding that white facilities received. Because the people making those decisions were all white. So the facilities for Black people were in terrible condition.

That's why the phrase "separate but equal" really meant separation, inequality, and exclusion. But those words were used to hide racial discrimination. That system continued for nearly seventy years.

That's exactly what The Washington Post meant when it described MTV's decision as "separate but equal." By creating a K-pop category, it looked as though K-pop was being treated equally. But in reality, it excluded K-pop from competing in the main categories while hiding that exclusion.

At the time, there was another expression people in the West used to describe MTV's decision. Ghettoization. During Nazi Germany, Jews were confined to ghettos. So people said K-pop had been ghettoized. It had been placed in its own separate space.

That expression also has a precedent. When Black music began to rise in America, award shows grouped Black artists into R&B and Rap categories. Black artists would receive those awards, while the major awards continued to go to the mainstream. People called that the ghettoization of Black music.

So MTV received that criticism. After that, MTV nominated BTS in the regular Pop category. And BTS won.

At the time, Billboard wrote that BTS had entered through the side door, and that it had taken a long time before they were finally allowed to use the front door like everyone else. After MTV, the other award shows adapted to that criticism.

The Grammys were the last one left. The Grammys see themselves as the most prestigious music awards because, unlike other shows, there is no fan voting. Like the Academy Awards, only industry professionals vote.
So they created a side door, just like MTV. This was basically saying, "Asia, come in through the side door. Separate but equal."

When MTV did this, BTS still attended despite the controversy. But this time, BTS declared to the American mainstream music industry, "We're not using the side door anymore." And they refused.

That's why Western media, who understand this context exactly, praised BTS. They said, "Well done." They called it the spirit of the times.

That's how I see it too. I think this will remain a landmark in world cultural history for a long time.

An artist from outside the mainstream boycotted the most prestigious award in the mainstream and declared, "You are out of step with the times."

It's contextually similar to Black Americans demanding racial equality and human equality.

That's why western media call it the spirit of the times. Some in Korea don't immediately understand why it's being called that. They think, "Wouldn't this have been a good opportunity for Asian artists?"

That Friday's comment comes from not seeing how people in America think about this issue. That's all I wanted to add.”
—--------------------------
For those who understand Korean, you can watch the video of his commentary here. (I wish I knew how to add English subtitles, but unfortunately I don't.)

https://t.co/bsgO5X8KwA

[seeingbtsinamonth💜 @orul8ce]

Forbes article 👀👀👀👀 dammm mainstream media not holding back lfg!!!!🔥🔥👏

BTS’s decision to withdraw from Grammy consideration has reignited a conversation the music industry has been quietly having for years: what happens when the world’s biggest artists feel unseen by the institutions designed to celebrate them?
The exchange highlights the larger debate at the center of BTS’s Grammy journey: whether expanding categories creates more opportunities for recognition, or whether those categories risk placing artists into boundaries they have already outgrown.🔥🔥🔥🔥👏

Ultimately, BTS’s legacy was never created by a nomination. It was built through stadiums filled across continents, records broken across markets, and a global community that transformed the relationship between artists and audiences.🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥👏👏👏👏💜

The question facing the Grammys is no longer whether artists like BTS belong in the conversation. It is whether the conversation itself is ready to expand.
For decades, artists have stepped away from the Grammys because they felt misunderstood, overlooked, or limited.🫩🙄

https://t.co/r8kWJPG1sN

[BTS Data Archive @btsdatarchive]

I’m not sure how informed are you about SWIM performance on charts-

But if it can’t pick up the streams in US and UK, at the end of the year it won’t have a trophy at the awards.

In Korea is also not predicted for a major win

[⟬⟭K@te 💜 ARMYOT7 ⟭⟬ @Kate87ven]

🚨 ¡Se acercan los MAMA Awards 2026 y el Daesang para "ARIRANG" es nuestro objetivo!

🏆Me tomé la libertad de investigar y armar estas guías con la información clave basándome en lo que aprendimos de las votaciones pasadas.

[dictator mbapbella @7adorablereps]

“The Grammys 2027 Best Asian Pop Music Category Is Just Another Form of Segregation. It can be seen as part of a history of gatekeeping non-white artists from major award categories.”

— Teen Vogue

#Grammys #BTS #Music #ArtHasNoAliens

[💜영원한 아미💜(BTS7) @vdkfjhfh]

국내 아미분들 스윔 스밍해주셔야 합니다
다들 연말 시상식에서 방탄 보고 싶죠??
무조건 스밍해주세요
성적이 나와야 상 받을 수 있어요!!
💜💪🔥🙏🤦

[ak ⁷ | #ArtHasNoAliens 🛑 @Bangtan_Caramel]

All of you need to read and spread this article by Forbes questioning the intentions of the Grammys

https://t.co/B1ra14u5hD

[Tina | ⊙⊝⊜ @MinYoongiSwagg7]

“BTS Just Shined a Light on the Grammy’s Diversity Problem” -Forbes

Worth a read!

https://t.co/0r7aLrQgHe

[sᴇʀᴇɴᴅɪᴘɪᴛʏ⁷ @pjmmuse_]

this is THE BTS edit

[♡ @amlysbang]

This is the most coverage the GRAMMYs has gotten in years LMAOOO

https://t.co/xzRdXs9DX2

[Shan saw Louder Than Bombs Live 🪭 @readonlyshan]

.

[Pooja Shali @PoojaShali]

"My first husband stripped me naked and threw me and my daughters out of the house. Neighbours wrapped me in a quilt and my parents took us away. As I hold this gold medal in Glasgow, my message to every woman in India is to fight back against abuse."

https://t.co/LDRr8meTC1

[Pop Base @PopBase]

BTS announces they will not submit their music for the 2027 GRAMMY awards, following the Recording Academy’s addition of an Asian-focused category:

“I hope music itself can be heard and loved rather than being distinguished by region or language.”

[BTS Charts & News @btschartsxdaily]

[BBC] BTS have announced they will not submit their music for consideration at the 2027 Grammy Awards!

Formed in 2013, #BTS have become one of pop's biggest-selling acts, and their current world tour is expected to rival Taylor Swift's Eras concerts at the box office.

[BTS Charts @btschartdata]

“Aliens” is currently #1 on iTunes in 24 countries worldwide

[Pop Crave @PopCrave]

BTS will not be submitting their music for Grammy consideration following the introduction of the Asian-focused category, ‘Best Asian Pop Music Performance’:

“We hope our music can be heard and loved for what it is, rather than being divided by region or language.”