GRUNGECAKE

Category: Pop Culture

  • JPEGMAFIA fires back at Danny Brown over ‘Scaring the Hoes 2’ comments: “This Isn’t True”

    When crafty, unpredictable artists like JPEGMAFIA and Danny Brown team up, something interesting tends to happen. Their 2023 effort, ‘Scaring the Hoes’, was celebrated for its wild production and chemistry—no ordinary Hip-Hop collaboration. The culmination of that success left fans hungry for a sequel. But things have gotten a bit messy.

    In an interview with Billboard, Danny Brown claimed that the follow-up album ‘Scaring the Hoes 2’ was being delayed because JPEGMAFIA wasn’t showing up. Brown’s words: “It’s up to Peggy! I’ve been ready”, he said.

    “I call him all the time, tell him, ‘Let’s do it.’ He tells me, ‘I’m comin’, I’ll be there on this day.’ That day comes, he don’t come. That’s been the process for a while.”

    For many fans, Brown had set the narrative: the sequel exists, the will is there—but one half of the duo is not playing ball. Enter JPEGMAFIA, who pushed back publicly, via social media, saying Brown’s assertions are false. He tweeted and retweeted, “This isn’t true. I personally texted Danny today and told him to stop lying for lame teenagers on the internet. Because this is the second time he’s done it.” 

    He didn’t stop there. JPEGMAFIA added:

    “This year I’ve been taking care of a sick family member all year—that’s why I haven’t been around. Stop making things up to entertain yourself. I’m not part of your marketing plan.”

    He was careful to insist there’s no personal animosity, but did question Brown’s decision to air allegations publicly instead of reaching out directly:

    “I have no beef with Danny… It’s just weird that he goes on the internet to say things he never says in person, when he could just call or text me. There’s no need to blast literal lies to teenagers who thirst for bullshit all day.” 

    So what’s really at stake here? A few threads to pick apart:

    Photo: Pittsburgh Magazine

    1 The sequel-expectation trap
    When the original album landed and resonated, the sequel became inevitable. But expectations rise as soon as you say ‘2’ or ‘Part II’. Brown’s comments suggest he was ready, and the public assumed production must just be delayed. But JPEGMAFIA’s explanation adds context: life stuff happens (in this case, caring for a sick family member). In creative partnerships, such personal factors often get hidden until they Pop publicly.

    2 Narrative control & public discourse
    Brown went to media; JPEGMAFIA responded on social. Both are shaping how fans perceive the project’s status. Brown’s version: He’s kept reaching out, the other side is stalling. JPEGMAFIA’s version: those claims are lies, my absence is for personal reasons, I’m not holding you up. Both sides have to manage brand, legacy, and the relationship with their fan base.

    3 Fan/industry implications
    If ‘Scaring the Hoes 2’ is delayed indefinitely (or worse, shelved) because of this conflict—or worse, because of lack of clarity—fans may lose patience. Industry watchers might also interpret this as a red flag: two artists who collaborated well once, now stiff-arming each other publicly. This could affect future collaborations, label negotiations, and promotional strategies.

    4 The human element
    Caring for a sick family member is a heavy burden. JPEGMAFIA’s mention of this shifts the frame from “creative delay” to “life happens”. It invites empathy, yet also calls into question the timing of public claims made by Brown. In other words: How do you balance transparency with respect for privacy? When creativity is a public act, personal issues become public too.

    In summary
    The sequel to ‘Scaring the Hoes’ is still talked about—and maybe still exists—but its pathway is now murky. Danny Brown believes the project is held up by JPEGMAFIA; JPEGMAFIA says the narrative is false and that he’s been unavailable for valid personal reasons, not for stalling. The public spat raises questions about creative partnerships, timing, how artists manage fan expectations, and how much of the behind-the-scenes world gets broadcast.

  • McDonald’s introduces cash rounding policy as United States prepares to phase out penny

    [media-credit name=”McDonald’s” link=”https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-stories/media-assets-library/media-article/mcdonald_s_wordmark.html” width=300 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    McDonald’s has quietly changed how it handles cash transactions in response to the forthcoming phase-out of the penny in the United States. Under the new policy, if a cash purchase ends in 1–2 ¢, the total is rounded down to 0 ¢; if it ends in 3–4 ¢, it is rounded up to 5 ¢; endings in 6–7 ¢ are rounded down to 5 ¢; and 8–9 ¢ are rounded up to 10 ¢. Totals ending in 0 or 5 ¢ remain unchanged.

    Importantly, prices listed on the menu stay the same. The change applies only to cash payments—card and digital payments still process the exact cents. ‌

    Why the shift? The United States Department of the Treasury will stop minting new pennies by early 2026 due to production costs that exceed the coin’s value. In 2024, the Treasury reportedly lost $85.3 million from minting over three billion pennies. With fewer pennies in circulation, retailers are beginning to adopt “cash-rounding” methods. Other businesses like Kwik Trip and Sheetz have already introduced similar policies.

    Reactions among customers have been mixed. Some argue the practice is confusing and feels like a hidden price increase, especially when rounding goes up.

    “Why not just change the damn prices?” one commenter asked.

    Others point out that countries such as Canada and Australia have operated with similar rounding systems for years and find the move practical.

    From your vantage, it raises interesting questions about cash, convenience and fairness. If you pay by cash at McDonald’s, you may pay as little as two cents less—or as much as one to four cents more—than the listed total. For card users, nothing changes. And given that cash usage is already declining, this shift might pass unnoticed for many. Yet for people paying in cash, especially frequent-small-amount customers, it’s something to keep an eye on.


  • Ben & Jerry’s co-founder launches ‘Peace for Palestine’ ice cream after Unilever blocks flavour

    [media-credit name=”Bloomberg” width=860 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen has revealed that the decision by parent company Unilever to block the launch of a new flavour intended to show solidarity with Palestine has deepened a long-standing fault line between activism and corporate control.

    According to Cohen, he will proceed independently with the flavour via his personal venture, Ben’s Best, citing Unilever’s refusal to permit the original brand’s engagement in certain “social mission” initiatives.

    The proposed flavour is a watermelon-flavoured sorbet, its colour palette—red, green, black, and white—intentionally echoing the Palestinian flag, Cohen explains in a video posted on Instagram.

    He stated: “I’m making a watermelon-flavoured ice cream that calls for permanent peace in Palestine and for repairing the damage that was done there.”

    This development occurs against the backdrop of a fraught history: Ben & Jerry’s pulled out of sales in Israeli-occupied territories in 2021, sparking legal and commercial entanglements which led Unilever to divest the brand’s Israeli operations to a local licensee. Cohen claims that Unilever and the soon-to-be-split ice cream division Magnum have unlawfully prevented Ben & Jerry’s from fulfilling its founding values.

    In his view, the activation of the watermelon sorbet through Ben’s Best is a way to reset the mission that was sidelined. Whilst the original brand remains under Unilever’s corporate umbrella, Cohen’s independent path signals an intensifying dispute over how far an activist-oriented brand can tread within the constraints of a multinational parent.

    Whether the new flavour will gain widespread distribution—or how Unilever or the broader market will respond—remains uncertain. What is clear: the moment highlights how ice cream, branding, and global politics are now deeply intertwined.


  • Offset’s tax debt soars amid Cardi B divorce drama, allegedly

    [media-credit name=”Instagram” link=”https://www.instagram.com/p/DPmEzvkAIgY/?img_index=1″ width=1440 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    Rapper Offset is facing a mounting tax problem just as his divorce from Cardi B plays out. Reports say his unpaid tax debt has grown into the seven-figure range, putting fresh pressure on already tense personal and financial dynamics.

    According to the coverage, the IRS and state filers have imposed multiple liens on Offset’s property—one federal lien reportedly at about $1.5 million for tax liabilities tied to recent years, with additional amounts from state authorities. The exact total remains somewhat unclear publicly, but insiders say it’s “close to $2 million”.

    What makes this more than a mere tax story: All this unfolds whilst Cardi B and Offset’s divorce negotiations are stalled. Cardi has publicly claimed one of the sticking points is Offset’s financial demands, including that she cover his tax bills and property transfers in order to finalise the split.

    For fans, analysts and anyone watching celebrity finances, several themes emerge:

  • The tax liens raise questions about Offset’s financial planning, obligations and potential exposure beyond just the musical brand.
  • The divorce context adds a layer of complexity: financial liabilities aren’t just personal—they can influence asset division, custody, and public image.
  • Cardi B’s willingness to highlight the tax issue suggests she sees it as more than incidental—she frames it as part of the leverage around their separation.
  • Whilst neither party has provided full transparent accounting, the debt alone is large enough to affect settlement talks, future earnings and how both artists navigate their independent paths. In the coming months, watch for how the liens get resolved, whether Offset pays down or structures the debt, and how that resolution affects his and Cardi’s public and professional narratives.


  • Kourtney Kardashian-Barker introduces lollipops aimed at vaginal wellness: Lemme

    Kourtney Kardashian-Barker has expanded her wellness product line with a candy marketed as a product to support the vagina.

    [media-credit name=”Lemme” width=800 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    In a move sure to spark conversation, Kourtney Kardashian-Barker’s wellness brand, Lemme, has released a new offering: “Lemme Purr Probiotic Lollipops”, billed as a product designed to support vaginal health.

    The lollipops reportedly combine probiotics, Vitamin C and pineapple extract in a sweet treat form, and are being marketed as a fun, simple way to include feminine-care into daily routines. Exclusively available at Target, they come in five-packs and are positioned as vegetarian, non-GMO confection-supplements targeting the vaginal microbiome.

    From the brand’s press release, Kardashian-Barker said: “Lemme Purr Lollipops are such a fun extension of one of our best-sellers… I love that they turn daily self-care into something sweet and simple.”

    Here’s what to note:

  • What it claims: The product purports to support vaginal wellness, potentially helping with freshness and microbial balance.
  • What’s new: Whilst Lemme already had probiotic gummies for intimate/vaginal health, this is the first time the brand has released the lollipop format targeting that specific goal.
  • The push-back potential: As with any supplement or wellness product aimed at intimate health, there are questions about how well a lollipop format can deliver the promised benefits, and whether the messaging simplifies the underlying health issues.
  • Marketplace context: This comes at a time when celebrity-backed wellness products are under increased scrutiny, both for marketing claims and scientific backing.
  • For writers, marketers, or wellness observers, this is a textbook intersection of celebrity branding, wellness culture and provocative product design. It raises the question: When is a candy just candy, and when is it pitched as medicine?


  • Nelly Furtado quits music after body-shaming attacks: “I’m still a songwriter forever”

    [media-credit name=”Instagram” link=”https://www.instagram.com/p/DAoal9Ay5Iz/?hl=en&img_index=1″ width=1440 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    GRAMMY Award-winning Canadian singer-songwriter Nelly Furtado has announced she is stepping away from performing “for the foreseeable future”, citing a wave of body-shaming attacks as a painful factor in her decision.

    Furtado made the revelation in an emotional Instagram post commemorating the 25th anniversary of her debut album ‘Whoa, Nelly!’. In that same message, she expressed gratitude for her longstanding fans, reflected on the joy of reaching newer generations, and explained that whilst she’s retiring from live shows, she will “identify as a songwriter forever”.

    She emphasised that although performing onstage has brought her joy (most recently at a Summer show in Berlin), the negative scrutiny over her appearance has taken a toll. In solidarity with her body-positive stance, she once performed at Manchester Pride wearing an oversized T-shirt adorned with a cartoon hourglass figure and the slogan “Better than ever”—a pointed rebuke of public commentary about her physique.

    She also looked back on her career with appreciation—to her collaborators, her touring years, and the unpredictable ways her music has been rediscovered over time. Furtado emphasised that her pivot to a new chapter doesn’t erase her creative identity, saying she still loves writing music and wants to explore “other creative and personal endeavours” more suited to this next phase of life.

    Fans responded with an outpouring of support, many lamenting the decision and celebrating her legacy in pop music. As one commented, “Forever an icon.”

    Whilst the announcement feels like a pause rather than a full stop, it underscores the pressure countless artists face when their art becomes conflated with personal image. For now, Nelly Furtado’s bold vulnerability stands as part of her lasting imprint—both as a musician and as a voice pushing back at the cruelty of appearance-based criticism.


  • Beyoncé turns heads whilst shopping in Qatar wearing traditional hijab (See photo)

    [media-credit name=”Parkwood Entertainment” width=662 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    The music icon was spotted earlier this week in Doha, Qatar, stepping into a sleek, all-black ensemble paired with a traditional headscarf. According to reports, she visited a location of Yves Saint Laurent inside one of the city’s major shopping malls, wandering through the store’s windows and browsing, though she wasn’t seen walking out with bags in hand.

    It’s an interesting moment on several levels. First: The look. Beyoncé opting for a headscarf and full-coverage outfit is more than a fashion statement—it nods to local cultural norms and shows a kind of respect or awareness in how she presents herself abroad. Second: The context. With her tour wrapped up and less in the public concert mode, this more subdued shopping appearance gives us a peek at one of her quieter “off-duty” moments—even if she can’t quite hide.


    Some questions for us to chew on: Was this purely leisure, or perhaps part of a larger trip? (There are reports she’s travelling with her partner, JAY Z, though he wasn’t spotted in the store.)

    Also, will this influence her aesthetic going forward? Artists often lean into travel-inspired elements in their next big project.

    In any case, Beyoncé’s Qatar outing reminds us how celebrity, culture, travel, and fashion continue to mix in unexpected ways. She still commands attention—just maybe from a quieter aisle.


  • D4vd’s former landlord hires private investigator in ongoing Tesla corpse case

    [media-credit name=”Nina Westervelt/Billboard via Getty Images” link=”https://www.mensjournal.com/entertainment/romantic-homicide-singer-d4vd-issues-statement-on-celestes-death-investigation” width=739 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    In a perplexing and tragic turn of events, the landlord of the Los Angeles home previously rented by rising artist D4vd has reportedly engaged a private investigator to dig deeper into the discovery of a teen’s remains in the trunk of D4vd’s impounded Tesla.

    The remains belonged to fifteen‑year‑old Celeste Rivas, whose body was recovered weeks ago in a case that has shocked music fans and the public alike. Whilst the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) continues its official investigation, the homeowner, Mladen Trifunovic, has expressed frustration at being left in the dark. He states that he “hasn’t heard anything from police” and that the private investigator is working, but has no findings to share yet.

    Trifunovic also emphasised his desire to “respect both the LAPD’s investigation and the memory of the victim.” The police, for their part, say this remains an open, ongoing case. They have confirmed that D4vd is not currently a suspect, and that the cause and manner of Rivas’ death have not yet been determined. Law enforcement has noted that the fatality likely occurred weeks before the remains were found.

    The relationship—if any—between Celeste Rivas and D4vd remains murky.

    As the homeowner’s private investigation proceeds alongside the LAPD’s efforts, the music community and the public await clarity and justice for Rivas and her family. The case underscores the collision of fame, tragedy, and legal scrutiny—and raises serious questions about transparency and accountability in high‑profile investigations.


  • TikTok star Mainly Mannie reveals HIV diagnosis and faces $4K monthly treatment costs

    [media-credit name=”Instagram” link=”https://www.instagram.com/p/DJu2lm-vV7y/?img_index=1″ width=662 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    TikTok creator Mainly Mannie publicly revealed an HIV diagnosis in mid-October, sharing the news via videos made in a hospital setting. He explained that he lost his ability to walk before discovering the diagnosis, and as of his update, he’s in rehabilitation trying to relearn movement. He emphasised that, after beginning treatment, he feels “way better” and closer to his former self, saying, “I feel like me.”

    The cost of his treatment is steep: Roughly $4,000 per month, which prompted Mannie to launch a GoFundMe campaign. So far, donations—including small and large contributions—have already totalled over $12,000. In the videos, he expresses gratitude, acknowledging that the generosity gives him hope for “a better future”.

    What interests me about this moment is how it lives at the intersection of vulnerability, public identity, and health justice. Mannie is a content creator with a platform—he’s able to tell his truth, but he also confronts medical costs that many people face behind closed doors. The spectacle of needing crowdfunding for essential treatment underscores structural gaps in healthcare systems, especially for marginalised or precarious earners.

    At the same time, his disclosure carries social weight: It challenges stigma around HIV, normalises conversations about chronic illness, and reminds followers that “internet fame” doesn’t insulate one from suffering. But with that comes risk—criticism, invasion of privacy, judgment.

    I see this as a kind of reckoning: Mannie is asking his audience to witness him in his brokenness, to see both the body and the person. Whether or not people rally, his act of showing up as flawed is itself a form of courage.


  • Nicki Minaj faces loss of $20M Hidden Hills home over assault judgment

    [media-credit name=”Rodin Eckenroth/Wireimage” width=662 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    Nicki Minaj may be in danger of losing her Los Angeles mansion—valued at about $20 million—to satisfy a court judgment stemming from a 2019 assault claim. The plaintiff, Thomas Weidenmüller (who had worked in security at one of Minaj’s concerts in Germany), alleges that Kenneth Petty—Minaj’s husband—struck him unexpectedly, breaking his jaw and requiring eight surgeries. A default judgment awarded Weidenmüller $503,318 in damages. The plaintiff, Thomas Weidenmüller (who had worked in security at one of Minaj’s concerts in Germany), alleges that Kenneth Petty—Minaj’s husband—struck him unexpectedly, breaking his jaw and requiring eight surgeries. A default judgment awarded Weidenmüller $503,318 in damages.

    Weidenmüller’s legal team says repeated demands for payment were ignored, prompting them to petition the court to put Minaj’s Hidden Hills estate up for sale. The property reportedly carries a $13,258,000 mortgage lien and a homestead exemption of approximately $722,151, leaving an estimated $6 million of equity–more than enough, according to the papers, to satisfy the judgment and accrued costs.

    Attorneys for the plaintiff argue that Minaj’s considerable net worth (estimated between $150 million and $190 million) underscores her ability—and obligation—to settle. Minaj and Petty, as of the latest report, have not publicly responded. This development adds a legal dimension to Minaj’s public narrative. Whether the court approves a forced sale, or Minaj arranges payment another way, remains to be seen.