La Melliza Sparks Online Backlash with Controversial Comments on "Good" and "Bad" Hustlers

Cuban influencer Yainelis Ramírez, widely known as La Melliza, has once again found herself at the center of controversy. A snippet from an interview in which she claimed, "There are hustlers who are good," has gone viral. She defended men who rely financially on their partners, stating it's acceptable if they drop them off at work, pick them up, and wait patiently at home.

These remarks, made during a discussion on the "Ernesto Behind the Scenes" podcast, have triggered a wave of criticism across social media. Many users have questioned the "unusual" categorization by the Miami-based content creator.

A Viral Clip Stirs Controversy

In a mere 32-second video clip, La Melliza differentiates between what she terms "good hustlers" and "bad hustlers."

"There are hustlers who are good, who take you to work, pick you up, and stay quietly at home waiting for their woman. They chose that life, and then there are others who are the worst. They drop you off at work, go to clubs, and spend the money you bring on others. Those are the bad ones. But the one who stays home waiting peacefully, that's a choice you made," she stated.

The interview was recorded approximately two months before the clip began circulating widely at the end of August and throughout September. However, it only took those few seconds to ignite a heated debate.

Social Media Reactions

"Now there are good hustlers": Social media reacts. A post on the Instagram account "Por Una Cuba Libre" sparked a flood of comments, filled with both outrage and sarcasm.

"Good hustlers. Such entrepreneurial and advanced thoughts, but well, everyone with their life. Diversity is what makes this world so interesting," one user sarcastically remarked.

Another questioned, "Normalizing pimping and prostitution is an indicator of how badly off we are as a society."

The "Por Una Cuba Libre" account itself shared the video with a reflection on the erosion of values: "In the Cuban community, we've reached a point where what should provoke indignation is accepted as normal."

Reflecting on Her Past

During the interview, La Melliza also revealed her nine-year stint as a dancer in Miami nightclubs, a period during which she admitted to drug use.

Additionally, she mentioned that her ex-partner Jacel "never worked a day in his life in this country" and that his main contribution to their relationship was driving her to and from work.

Initially resistant to labeling him as a hustler, she ultimately acknowledged the contradiction in her argument. "Jael was never a hustler because I didn't see him that way, you see? Because he was my husband. But that's what he was," she confessed.

Public Debate Intensifies

The controversy also extended to YouTube, where content creator Adrian Peachy posted a nearly 51-minute reaction video that amassed over 85,000 views.

In the video's comments, many viewers not only questioned La Melliza's statements but also the influence she holds over her audience.

"The problem is that we've normalized these behaviors. It's one thing for her to say funny things sometimes, okay, but for people to see her as a role model, my God, we are in a bad place as a society," a viewer commented.

Another lamented, "What a way to normalize degradation and see these cases as examples of success."

A third comment highlighted concern about those who celebrate her statements: "To me, the worrying part isn't her, as she's just one person, but the hundreds who laugh at her antics and say she's the best and that everything she says is right. That's where the real problem lies."

The discussion also showed that not everyone interprets financial arrangements within a couple the same way. However, relying financially on someone else does not necessarily equate to prostitution, a distinction blurred in the influencer's words.

It's not the first time La Melliza has been involved in public controversy. In September, she also sparked debate with her remarks on Cuban immigrants with I-220A forms, criticized by communicator Alexander Otaola.