I have been mulling this song over because the first time I heard it I wasn’t sure about it.
There is more than one lens to look at the concept of “basic” white women.
On one hand, the concept of a basic white woman seems to follow the trend of invalidating things that teenage girls like. Which is fucked up and misogynistic. So making fun of slightly older (20s-30s) basic white women is a continuation of that. And the criticism most often comes from men. So the middle part of the song where he “humanizes” the person behind the concept of “basic white women” is well done imo. It says she is also a person with a whole life behind the very common vague artistic aesthetics.
However, what this song barely acknowledges is a more critical analysis of a “basic white women” in relation to racial privilege. A basic white woman is often associated with being unaware of her racial privilege and also using it to deny complicity in white supremacist systems. There are a couple moments where this is almost mentioned (Lord of the rings quote misattribured to MLK, street art) but it is never quickly and cleverly expanded upon.
To clarify, I don’t necessarily think he should write a whole song about it, but it really should have been highlighted a bit more. Yes, you can be a basic white women, help uphold Eurocentric beauty and white supremacist institutions by not critically self engaging, and also have lost your mom and dad.
Upon first watching I was worried that he was “punching down” with his jokes, but he wasn’t really, it was joking about it and bringing humanization into it, but the comments on privilege were just a tad underwhelming.