Victimatus virtus non est

Caribbean immigrant to UK / Long posts tagged #long or #long post / Officially mentally unwell // Please don't hostile ping me into any arguments, or hostile ping others to see my posts.

[cherchezlafatfemme]

Have y'all heard about the dog groomer that dyed a dog green without the owners consent?

The post started circulating in my pet industry groups and now it's hit the news, shit is bananas

[stuff-for-your-scroll]

I fell down this rabbit hole so hard and it just gets worse and worse. Like at the end of the news article about it they have a response from her and…

“UpNorthLive reached out to Boyles to see if she was interested in explaining her side.

This is the statement she sent in response:

‘I would like to address some recent comments regarding my actions. Throughout my career, I have always aimed to maintain a positive and respectful environment. I acknowledge that my decision regarding the splash of color may have crossed certain boundaries, and for that, I sincerely apologize.

When the family left my establishment, they appeared to be happy, and I received no indication of any dissatisfaction at that time. I even provided them with a card and additional treats as a gesture of goodwill. In an effort to resolve any concerns, I issued a refund prior to the online comments made about me.

I understand that my initial apology may not have been perfect, but my intention was to minimize conflict and ensure a positive outcome. It's disheartening to see how some individuals choose to diminish others rather than support them.’”

How can anyone be this stubbornly unable to admit fault? How can you possibly, with hindsight and SO much backlash, not understand how egregious this is??? Completely bananas!

Perhaps the wildest thing though is that the instance that went viral isn’t even the most bonkers one? Like look at this one!

It’s so bad that other grooming businesses with similar names are needing to post to explain that they are not the one that dyes dogs bright colours without owners’ consent! Bonkers.

[emmaubler]

"My excuse is I'm young lol"

That line right there feels very revealing as to the rogue groomer's mindset. They are absolutely used to skating on that "I am so young and quirky and isn't that endearing" bit, to the point where they have no respect for others' boundaries or real life animals. Their texts blithely cite better to ask forgiveness than permission, only for the owner to reveal they had in fact asked for permission, been denied, and just decided to do whatever they wanted anyway, just counting on their age and general adorableness to shield them from consequences.

[trickstarbrave]

I have been enjoying seeing people experience food this World Cup

[beardedmrbean]

this guys makes good posts, not sure if it's a RP or not, but the account is a fun read regardless

[thememedaddy]

[zionismandunashamedofitforever]

somebody help jolt my memory.

when bill gates was the richest man alive, did the leftards demand his money as well? or is he exempt due to being on the leftarded side of the climate hoax?

[republicansaretheproblem]

[generallemarc]

Elon Musk's entire net worth could fund the government for a couple months. And yet it's supposed to be enough to end homelessness?

[monochromaticchime]

Hypothetically if red tape were less of an issue and Musk was both willing and able to liquidate large portions of his wealth to fund the construction of housing he could build homes for everyone. That’s a lot of ifs though.

[generallemarc]

Only kinda. See, if he were to liquidate any substantial portion of his assets the amount of cash he could liquidize them into would fall off a cliff. There's always a hit in liquidating assets, that's why the term "liquidate" has become a synonym for destroy, but when the owner of a large company starts selling off most or all of his stake then everyone panics, thinking that he'd never do that unless it was going to be even less profitable to keep it, leading to the value plummeting overnight and the money he gets from said sale being WAY less than what the figure would be on paper. The bigger the stake and the more valuable the company, the more severe this effect gets. And basically all of Elon's net worth comes from his stakes in the companies he owns, so for him to do this would result in tens if not hundreds of billions being lost just in the liquidation process, to say nothing of all the people working at those companies who'd be affected by their best-thing-since-sliced-bread employer suddenly becoming as stable as a major bank in 2008.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

There's also the question of "how many homeless people would ruin their free homes, because you didn't address the drug addition and/or mental issues that are often the real root problem".

I also like how Carlin addresses politicians in General, yet OP is an anti-GOP account specifically.

Maybe they're expecting the target audience to go "oh, no OUR politicians wont' do that!"

[dduane]

A report on some discourse (if that’s the word we’re looking for) going on at Threads

…With the clarification that “I don’t even go there.” …But get this (via @jobrammer.bluesky.social):

…Um.

[yamelcakes]

the post in question

[emmaubler]

[generallemarc]

Oh hey, it's the one platform that matters less than this one.

[sluglover666]

Hot take, but even if you ARE punching up (instead of punching sideways at a group that is in the same boat as you), there's a limit to what you can say without sounding like a violent facist but woke this time.

Making fun of a group of people that are privileged over you is one thing, but wishing non-cartoonish violence and death on them ("they should fall off a cliff" vs. "they should be wiped out"), wishing sexual violence on them, dehumanising them, claiming that they're less capable of creating art or living meaningful lives, saying that their relationships are inherently shallow and fake - these things are fucked up. I understand venting and saying extreme things when in pain, but when you find yourself regularly posting about wanting certain people tortured and killed, you need to examine that.

When the only thing stopping you from completely dehumanising someone is your own judgement regarding their privilege level relative to yours, you are not a safe person to be around.

[darkladynyara]

[emfrots]

"convince your followers that their Oppressor Class (whether real or imagined) is less deserving of human rights" is the oldest and most reliable trick in the book to incite mass violence, and you're not immune to it because you're a Good Person with Correct Opinions. you will continue to be a potential breeding ground for fascist thought until you stop dehumanizing people in any context, regardless of whether they deserve it or not, or how serious you are. there can be no acceptable targets.

[otakuvampyre]

Pretty sure most genocides in history, including the Holocaust, were justified with "we're punching up." 🤣 "We're killing our oppressors" has always been a convenient excuse to justify atrocities.

[cookingwithroxy]

It's pretty much the standard thing, it couples in with the 'X group is simultaneously stronger than us and weaker than us' view that is used to justify all forms of hate.

[rametarin]

And for fuck's sake, stop attributing all hate and malice and genocide strictly in terms of socialist/communist somehow = good while when bad thing happen = fascist.

More people have been killed in mass murder, slaughter and starvation targeted at killing different ethnic groups and kinds of people by Marxist principles, than under Nazi ones. This is an uncomfortable reality you must accept when talking about genocides in Africa and Asia. Marxists and socialist revolutionaries, spurred on and flames fanned by the Soviet Union, and their ridiculous Class Struggle Theories, their, "it's okay to hurt your oppressor, they deserve it" mentality, are what caused such violent tragedies.

They're the people using drug sales and consumption to push their socialist revolutions, both in South America, parts of North America, and across Africa and Asia. They're the people writing off every genocide as just being, "because of racists," or "because of capitalist greed" or, "because of state capitalism" (when they do mental gymnastics to imagine the Soviet Union as anything but based on Marxist principles with corruption.)

It doesn't stop being Marxist just because it goes bad.

Repeat: It doesn't stop being the fault of, or caused by Marxist principles when the thing goes bad.

[damnfandomproblems]

Fandom Problem #15,225:

A lot of people in modern fandom are weirdly hostile towards straight people and this usually comes from people who are the most vocal about tolerance, inclusion, and acceptance.

[saintofpride201]

Don't worry, they do the same to bi people too.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

It gets even worse when they try to dress up their personal preferences as political praxis.

[ula-star]

“The writers refuse to take criticism!”

Just because they refuse to listen to you in particular doesn’t mean they don’t accept criticism, Karen.

[takashi0]

Just because they won’t listen to you because you can’t say anything without sounding like a complete cunt doesn’t mean they’re not against criticism in general.

[die-jingler]

When you deal with a lot of bitching haphazardly disguised as “criticism” over a prolonged period of time, you tune it out. You’ve realized it’s not worth the trouble, therefore you reserve your energy for legit criticism that has the potential to change things.

I mean who are you going to listen to more? A customer who complains over the smallest of shit? Or a customer who does issue a complaint that specifically points out areas you need to improve on? I let the former’s bs go in one ear and out the other more times than I’d care to count back when I used to work retail.

[fierceawakening]

Also, giving criticism well is a skill. You have to learn how to do it. The kind of people who just decide “this whole premise offends my moral sensibilities” are generally not the kind of people who know how to do it or who feel the need to learn how. If you’re offended by the very idea of my story or want me to change the race of Character X after the damn thing is in print, I’m… not likely to listen to you. If you really enjoyed the story but as a member of Group Y are wondering whether I have any works about Y coming out soon, I’m much more likely to listen to you. You’re invested in what I’m doing, so I have reason to care about your opinion. I might even make the Y a subtle nod to you in some way! Same with “so this book did have a member of Group Y in it, and I really thought they were a neat character! But they had Mannerism Z, which is kind of stereotypical, and that bugged me. Is there a reason you did that, or did you not realize most of us don’t do that at all?” I can’t fix what’s already in print, but I can go “Oh, wait, no, I meant that very differently! Let me go see if others took it the same way! Oh, they did. How can I revise the sequel a bit so this isn’t so bad?”

[dr-dendritic-trees]

Yeah, good criticism should be totally pragmatic. You don’t necessarily need to hand-hold the person your critiquing through every exact step of what you need, but you should have a clear idea going in what they would have to do to please you, and it that thing is impossible, extremely difficult, or can be summarized as “write an entirely different story that suits me better” its probably best to keep it to yourself.”

[ula-star]

I’m amazed that my snippy agitated post caused good discussion about critique in general.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

This also applies to other subjects when people say their openly hateful nonsense is just "criticism".

And, ironically, they often think a polite, logical rebuttal of their criticism is just "refusing to take criticism"*.

Including at least one person in this thread.

*And will frequently resort to just naked insults and personal attacks.

[momo-y0te]

The word pussy has never referred to female genitalia when describing someone who is timid and cowardly by the way. It comes from the word pusillanimous. I’m begging Twitter feminists to stop tittering smugly about how they do this ultra feminist girlboss role reversal thing where they call men ballsacks because those are the more fragile set of parts. “Pussy” was never talking about your body parts. You are the only ones doing that. You are making the biggest fools of yourselves please stop

[brosef-von-dudehomie]

Also a more vulgar way of calling someone a scaredy cat, because pussy is also a word for cat, a species known for being easily frightened and overreacting.

[angrychicagoan24]

i’m gonna say something that will probably piss some people off

i do not think “kill all men” is a good or productive thing to say in any situation

[theo-needs-to-go]

my hot trans friends: don't worry honey trans conservatives with no analysis aren't real they can't hurt you

some fucking tumblr user:

[angrychicagoan24]

can’t believe i got called a conservative for saying that calling for genocide, even as a joke or hyperbole, is harmful i guess words mean nothing on tumblr.com

[siryouarebeingmocked]

[thesimpsonswayoflife]

[crazy-brazilian]

[lichina-lycanthrope]

i feel like a lot of people would respond to this by thinking it’s a sign of female privilege, as opposed to the clear sign that men are more violent and less rational than women that it actually is 😒🙄

[nico-nico-knee]

It literally is female privilege. A woman can beat her husband and he can call the cops. The chance that the husband gets arrested even with visible marks is way higher than the woman getting arrested

[lichina-lycanthrope]

full offense, i don’t expect you to give a single shit about the truth of whether or not “female privilege” exists, considering your blog is approximately 99% signs that you have a hentai addiction, many of the pictures being of underage anime girls (as evidenced by their school uniforms), so i’m inclined to view you as a misogynist. i will be blocking you, because i can say with a fair amount of certainty that i have spoken to individuals such as yourself about this topic before, and you will have nothing new or insightful to add. i have already heard the perspective someone like you has to offer, and it is not compelling.

but for literally anyone else: the reason i said what i said is because statistically speaking, a loud/angry man is far more of a danger to other people (note: primarily women, but i want to acknowledge that the google search did not specify the sex of the partner either time, so this also counts to male on male violence) than a loud/angry woman is to a man (or another woman, but she’s less of a threat to a man than she is another woman just based off the average size/weight/strength discrepancy and nothing else).

the google search results showing the dv support line when googling “husband yelling at me”, and the google search results showing that you should try having an honest conversation about feelings or consider counseling when googling “wife yelling at me” is not a sign of some mysteriously undocumented excess of female abusers, it’s a sign that men yelling at their partners is statistically more likely to result in (or be a sign of) domestic abuse than it is for women yelling at their partners.

i want to call to attention to something here: nowhere in that second screenshot does it say that what the wife is doing is okay. it suggests listening to her side of things, but only after telling the person in question to try to tell their wife how the yelling makes them feel, and it doesn’t say anywhere that the wife is in the right. the suggestion of couple’s counseling alone should be enough for you to acknowledge that the person answering the question (on quora, so it’s not even an official website for dv or anything) considered the yelling, in itself, to be a sign of marital issues. it is not about women being considered “in the right”, it is about the fact that they simply do not have the same statistical evidence of patterns of violence that men do.

i would wager to say that if women’s rates of being perpetrators of physical abuse/rape/murder were the same as men’s, the google results would look very similar to each other. but we do not live in that fictional world.

it is not a “privilege” to be considered less of a threat when you are statistically less of a threat. it is not a “privilege” to have prevalent patterns of abuse acknowledged, especially if very little is actually done about those patterns of abuse (think about how many times you hear about a woman calling the cops for dv and then later being murdered by the same man she called the cops on, or a man related to him).

[cheshireinthemiddle]

Actually, you can blame feminism.

See, Erin Pizzey, credited for opening the first women's abuse shelter in the world later learned that men were abused at about the same rates (even by some of the women in her shelter). So she made another shelter for men. It was a lot harder to find funding compared to the women's shelter, but she did it!

However...women and especially feminists protested her men's shelter, claiming that women could not be abusers and that the shelter was misogynistic for "wasting beds and supplies on men". Essentially they were angry about sharing the aid.

These women harassed Pizzey, likely killed her dog, and ran her out of the country, turning her men's shelter into a women's shelter and banning her from it forever.

These feminists sent a message and set a precedent that there would be opposition if anyone (especially the government) opened men's shelters.

Even to this day, feminist organizations like NIA (UK) and the Deluth Model (US) insist that onlyen can be abusers and women can only be victims. And they see inclusion of men as misogyny.

These organizations (and so many others) work with their governments and get funding. So it would look bad for any politician to support male victims and advocate for abuse shelters for men.

There are plenty of places like India, where DV is gendered by definition. And even in places where it isnt, men qho call for help against a female attacker are more likely to be arrested than the attacking woman. And witnesses are signifigantly less likely to recognize or help an abused man in public.

Feminists like yourself aid in this inequality by insisting that misamdry doesnt exist or trying to justify this inequality. Or for trying to twist it into misogyny.

In reality, even if only 1% of all abuse victims (it's way more than that), men's abuse shelters would still be vastly disproportionate to women's shelters. And the US government doesnt eveb fund men's shelters. Only women's shelters. So it's next to impossible to open aen's shelter unless youre rich.

It's misandry. Men not being recognized as victims and not receiving help based on their sex is systematic misandry.

Men deserve support. Abused men deserve to be recognized. Female abusers deserve punishment. None of this should be controversial, but unfortunately it is, for no other reason than that it's gender equality activism that includes men, and people like you cant have that.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

>full offense, i don’t expect you to give a single shit about the truth of whether or not “female privilege” exists, considering your blog is approximately 99% signs that you have a hentai addiction

"I decided that instead of actually addressing what you said or defending my own point, I'd check to see if you were a crimethinker or not and then performatively denounce you at length."

Weird how so many feminists are willing to blindly assume the Patriarchy is right whenever it's convenient for women.

>but for literally anyone else: the reason i said what i said is because statistically speaking, a loud/angry man is far more of a danger to other people (note: primarily women,

>so this also counts to male on male violence)

Most violence is male on male. It's not even close, according to crime stats.

If an angry man is more of a danger to women, why is that the case?

Also, since when does yelling at someone count as violence? Most of the people who've yelled at me have never laid a finger on me.

Thank God there's more recognition of male victims of abuse these days.

Though I do like the sneaky implication that the male version of the search would be directed at gay relationships, unlike most efforts to address domestic violence even in highly progressive countries.

[demonprincex]

on principle i'm completely with the tumblr users who wanna mock folks who don't listen to rap/hip-hop/jazz/country/etc but some of the discourse on the subject on here seems to indicate that people think merely consuming media is like an act of social justice or some shit and thinking about it like that is just as fucked. you're not like, doing a favor to Black people by putting on jazz records you know

[yagi1227]

[uncle-beanbag-mojave]

[the-davest-of-uncles]

[uncle-beanbag-mojave]

Uranium couldn't stop me

[shaftking]

Did you know you can't be racist towards white people?

That sounds like a very convenient excuse for all the people who are racist against white people.

[rosiewitchescottage]

It's a thoroughly transparent excuse.

I'm white, I acknowledge the equal humanity between myself and those of all other races.

This means that we have both equal rights and responsibilities, that we are equally capable of the the same human virtues and vices.

If I hate you for not being white then I am being racist.

If you hate me for being white, then you are being racist.

It's quite simple.

[shaftking]

Did you know you can't be racist towards white people?

That sounds like a very convenient excuse for all the people who are racist against white people.

[rosiewitchescottage]

It's a thoroughly transparent excuse.

I'm white, I acknowledge the equal humanity between myself and those of all other races.

This means that we have both equal rights and responsibilities, that we are equally capable of the the same human virtues and vices.

If I hate you for not being white then I am being racist.

If you hate me for being white, then you are being racist.

It's quite simple.

[sparrowlucero]

its kind of distressing how you can tell a lot of people see popular indie artists and writers and such as like "a Celebrity but one which i stand a half decent chance of bullying to death"

[wordcubed]

[grimogretricks]

And they hold them to much MUCH higher standards as well. They expect them to be perfect paragons in every regard and never slip up in the tamest mildest way even once, while faceless multi-million dollar conglomerate productions get a pass for all kinds of heinous stuff, and mainstream celebrities (especially straight white cis male ones) are applauded for showing the most basic glimmers of decency.

I have been reflecting lately on the standards of 'professionalism' that people expect from indie creators, and realising that really, no matter how you try and dress it up, it's not actually reasonable to expect any human to be able to sustain being viscerally hated by that many people at once. That level of vitriol and dislike is difficult for anyone to handle. The only solution for creators is to basically withdraw from where they have unfiltered access to fan reactions, and have someone else moderate all that for them to limit their direct access.

There's a lot of talk about whether or not it's reasonable to hold them to this standard and that standard, of course, and what should get a free pass and what should not, yet when it comes down to it, I think the most important thing to remember is very simple: it's never acceptable to pile on and send hate and insults and threats.

People conducting themselves respectfully and actually remembering there's another person on the other end of things, and not gleefully jumping onto a hate bandwagon would solve most of these issues.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

>faceless multi-million dollar conglomerate productions get a pass for all kinds of heinous stuff, and mainstream celebrities (especially straight white cis male ones) are applauded for

???