SHUT UP, JCINK!

Because someone needed to say what your echo chamber won’t. Brutal critiques, sharp takes, unpopular opinions, and no patience for performative mediocrity. Shut up, JCINK.

[shutupjcink]

Because someone had to say what your echo chamber won’t. Brutal critiques, unpopular opinions, and zero tolerance for performative mediocrity. Shut up, JCINK.

Disclaimer: This isn’t a gossip blog. It’s not for praise, hate, or “tea.” I am not affiliated with any other people/posts/blogs criticizing “tea” blogs. Just my personal thoughts that I'm finally saying aloud. /ask and /submit are open, but I block whiners on sight. So, spare us both from the bullshit.

[shutupjcink]

i didn’t disappear. thanks for the asks. i’ll respond back thoughtfully this weekend.

[shutupjcink]

Can I genuinely ask what the plan is by attempting to bait Burnbook? I know they’re not great for the community but I also don’t see why you’d waste time engaging with them either. I respect the fact if you don’t feel like answering, I’m just curious.

yeah, of course! i don’t mind answering. the truth is pretty simple. burnbook is a textbook predator. i’m not making this assertion to be inflammatory. in the beginning, i generally understood their assertion that the blog would stop existing if people stopped submitting. 

then, things shifted.

“burnie” became a colloquial address. familiarity is often the first “in” among predators. then, they established rules. predators want you to witness their exertion of control or power. burnbook always asserts that this is a “hobby,” and they have a normal life: partner, family, full-time job. aka they’re maintaining a double life. 

they establish sympathy: minority class, family tragedy, grief, and i’m not saying none of these things can exist. i’m stating that preying on sympathy is a friendly and well-established tactic used by predators. that’s science; not being an asshole.

to me, the escalations are why i finally submitted something, which burnbook was too cowardly to post. i understand though, there could finally be actual discourse about their behavior. i have considered saying something often over the last few months, and i admit that i was too passive and lazy to get involved.

my limit was when burnbook deflected opening the link sent by roxanne and blamed a “canadian friend or family” for checking on their behalf. a predator’s first victim is often a friend or family member.

today, they’re alleging that roxanne admitted that the ip grabber screenshots were doctored. burnbook confirmed the “doctored” information in the april 29th “kick off” post by confirming the location of who “checked” the links roxanne sent. 

both accounts can’t be true. 

this means: 

roxanne guessed that the person who looked at the link was canadian (unlikely), 

roxanne’s ip grabber actually pinged a canadian ip address , who could’ve been burnbook’s friend or family (as burnbook said), or 

what is probably the most likely truth: burnbook is canadian. after all, they posted a disclaimer and then immediately buried it under the queue.

if you ask for clarification, i’m sure that’ll be another conversation @rpcburnbook will table or won’t publish. 😂

[rpcburnbook]

pretty sure this is serena’s whiny ass lol // her and cass are terrible fucking people // this vague posting needs to end. either tell the whole story (which you won’t) or stop dragging people’s names just bc you’re bored (recommend). also fuck u bernie <3

*burnie

[shutupjcink]

*burnbook

pet names and nicknames are a form of grooming. predators establish themselves with nick/petnames as affection releases oxytocin. now, your brain is telling you: “omg! burnbook likes me! maybe they won’t post shit about me!” but this is really about control. burnbook has crafted a private persona, which (allegedly) only a few people are privy to, and it has almost become a “privilege” (gag!) to know the truth. nevertheless, the use of a nickname still provides you with a brief glimpse of intimacy that is selectively provided.

burnbook is a predator.

[shutupjcink]

@rpcburnbook, is this where you table the conversation? 😊

[rpcburnbook]

Hell I hope Roxanne deactivated her Tumblr bc people reported her for trying to d*xx people. I know I sure fucking did. Yeah tea blogs are toxic af but trying to d*xx people is basically Sparking Stalking and criminal behavior.

~

[shutupjcink]

except you cannot d*x someone solely from an ip address. at maximum, you have a general location and correct ISP provider (so long as they weren’t using a VPN).

plus, didn’t burnbook say it was friend who clicked the link? lol sure but whatever

no, it would not trigger any criminal investigation in literal any country. cannot think of a single law enforcement agency that would waste their time on a phishing experiment that yielded… what? both burnbook and tattler’s blogs are still available for public consumption. both phishing and d*xxying must yield an end result of abuse toward the “victim.” lol the only abuser in this equation is burnbook.

also, jcink’s TOS very clearly outlines ip tracking. burnbook has admitted to registering on a jcink site. therefore, they’ve given permission already. regardless, the minute they clicked on the site: permission granted. if there are ads on the site: probably permission granted twice.

burnbook, stop telling your friends to submit “d*xxying” asks. they’re really doing too much by including typos that any general keyboard would correct and weird capitalization, it’s giving: i’m intentionally trying to hide who i am but i am unfortunately an idiot. 🙄

[rpcburnbook]

Hermione being married to that piece of shit Ron nor Harry to his whole sister? // Why would it not surprise me if you call Ron piece of shit while likely actively supporting Draco with Hermione? It's always the Draco fans who wished death on her and called her racist terms.

~

[shutupjcink]

It's a bit ironic that Tattler published my longass submission yesterday, especially since it was sent in 25 days ago and the recent discussions on Tattler surrounding racism.

[shutupjcink]

The "No race/ethnicity bending" or "whitewashing" rule.

Unpopular opinion: I hate the “no race/ethnicity bending or whitewashing” rule. Let’s be honest - this is white folks all up in Black, Brown, Asian, Native, and everyone else’s business who doesn’t pass the paper bag test.

Sites toss around “racebending,” “whitewashing,” and “ethnicity bending” like they’re interchangeable, but they’re not. At all. Race, a construct invented by white people solely to justify discrimination, is not the same as ethnicity, which is cultural, complex, and often violently erased. This rule treats both like a blood quantum checklist straight out of a eugenics manual. It reeks of racial purity politics dressed up as “inclusivity.”

And it disproportionately targets nonwhite face claims.

White face claims? They get the full creative range. Sabrina Carpenter goes from Southern belle to Manhattan princess. But has anyone ever written her as Ashkenazi Jewish, the ethnicity she allegedly has? Of course not. Because Sabrina clearly doesn’t identify as Jewish, and whiteness never gets interrogated like that.

Then there’s the alternative: the virtue signaler (almost always a white woman) who personally Googles every face claim’s background to catalog every drop of heritage in the “ethnicity” field of your application. I can’t wait for the day a celebrity drops their 23&Me results and finds out they’ve got Neanderthal DNA. We gonna include extinct ethnicities too? More importantly, aside from filling out the field in the application, that’s usually the extent of their cultural connection.

Meanwhile, you’ll have an American Black family where Idris Elba (Sierra Leonean/Ghanaian, born in London) is cast as the father to Zendaya (Nigerian, German, Scottish, Icelandic, Macedonian), whose nationality is (Black) American, and suddenly - it’s dead silence. I’m using this example to highlight the hypocrisy; not to critique that specific casting, especially since the writers who bother to create Black families are, more often than not, nonwhite writers themselves.

And then there’s the bizarre trend this rule has created: the giant “blended/adopted kids” family. Not that y’all ever write a single word about the complexity of adoption, especially transracial adoption. For context, South Korea established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to examine ~200,000 European and American adoptions between 1950-90s and discovered systemic human rights abuses. Today, many Korean adoptees use the word "stolen" to describe their experiences. But sure, let’s vibe with your favorite K-pop or idol face claims named Moonshine, Thor, Cherry, Starling, Ruin, Winter, Fennel, Honey, Fox adopted by a sweet white couple. And don't forget their one white sister, played by everyone’s favorite racist Sydney Sweeney, named Rachel. Sounds very respectful and totally legit.

This rule isn’t about addressing whitewashing; it’s about preserving white comfort by avoiding uncomfortable conversations regarding race and ethnicity. Again: concepts your people created. This rule also implies everyone is forever linked to every strand of their DNA, when the reality is much messier. Google for five minutes and you’ll understand why most Eastern Europeans don’t identify as “German,” or why people of color rarely claim their “English, Scottish, French, Portuguese” ancestry. Those aren’t proud lineages; they’re colonial and imperialist scars.

Let me be clear: I’m not defending whitewashing. Erasure of marginalized characters is a real and ongoing issue. But this rule hasn’t led to more characters of color. It’s just made things harder for the people who were already writing them. Unless you’re writing Zoe Kravitz or Zendaya, y’all don’t even see our characters.

Face claims were always meant to be pictorial representations of original characters. If your character is just a 1:1 match of their face claim’s identity, is your character even original? Or are you projecting a parasocial crush onto a celebrity, who doesn't know you exist (likely never will) and whose actions you manipulate in fiction that they probably wouldn't approve of. You really think Christina Nadin wants to be portrayed as a cam girl with a daddy kink 100x? Or Madelyn Cline to be fucking Glen Powell as incestous siblings? Be so fucking for real right now.

Maybe the answer is simple: keep the “no whitewashing” rule. Let the rest go. Trust that if someone genuinely wants to write a nonwhite character, they’ll do the research and treat it with care. Because let’s be real: people are going to use their favorite face claims regardless. All this rule does is allow white characters to be whimsy, quirky, and unexamined, and reinforce that nonwhite characters (which implies nonwhite people in real life) are not those adjectives.

And look - we’re not a monolith. I’m sure some fellow nonwhite folks (the only opinions that matter here, tbh) will disagree with me. That’s fine. I still love and respect you. You’re allowed to curate your writing circle however you want. My issue is with the generalization, and how it burdens us disproportionately and gives the oppressor the loudest voice in the room.

Because here’s the truth: do you know what nonwhite people do notoriously well? We mind our motherfucking business. Maybe y’all should start doing the same. Because whatever this messy, bureaucratic rule was supposed to prevent, all it’s done is shift the burden onto us.

Which, you know… full circle moment.