let's talk about rage bait
some images are not neutral, nor are they accidents. they're designed to provoke a reaction--shock, jealously, disgust, even defensiveness--because emotion drives engagement, and engagement drives profit.
when you see a room full of makeup, a 30-step skincare routine, a even just a "quick haul", the goal isn't to inform you, but to make you feel something. that feeling is usually insecurity or outrage, mainly because both keep you scrolling.
some people feel inferior and ask "why don't i have this? am i behind?" others feel morally superior and declare "this is disgusting. people are so wasteful." both reactions still boost the post. both still feed to algorithm. the key point is that neither reaction threatens the system that produced the image in the first place.
that's usually why context is always missing. you never really hear whether products were gifted, returned, written off, expired, unused, etc. or whether the person is a professional, sponsored, or staging excess for attention. ambiguity is the point; confusion keeps you arguing in the comments instead of questioning why your questioning in the first place.
and i understand! professionals may need an excess of items to get their jobs done, but the system doesn't target professionals. it targets everyday people like you and me.
late stage capitalism doesn't need you to want these things, but it just needs you to be emotionally activated by them. outrage is just as profitable as aspiration.
so when people say "this is just meant to make you upset," they're right. But not in the way that they think. The issue isn't that you felt something, but more so that you're trained to emotionally respond to excess instead of critically interrogating it.
calling it out doesn't make you a buzz-kill (and believe me, people may call you that.) it's recognizing that when a system benefits from your insecurity, anger, or self-doubt, those feelings didn't come from nowhere.
titsay
baratheonpilled
romaincrisis
izzy806
kianamaiart
theartofmadeline
