I post things here to avoid posting them on my main blog. I'm usually super chill. Usually depression-oriented posts, or things I want to spread into the Tumblr Void without causing a huge fight on my blog that I'm caught in the middle of. Because god forbid I have an Opinion(tm).
horny straight women be like I want to lick his abs lol
horny straight men be like I want to tie her up in my basement and torture her. I am completely normal and we should all accept this as a usual occurrance
I tried looking for specifically posts on blogs that have the word basement in them then I realized that tags are a thing and there's lots of girls that are into rapeplay with other girls.
hey parents: there is literally no non-abusive reason a person would want the ability to read someoneâs emails, track their location, and go through their calls and text messages without their knowledge or consent.
I want to address the person who tagged this âwhat if theyâre missing??â
Google Trusted Contacts.
thatâs it, thatâs the answer.
what this does is allow you to set up a list of people who are able to request your location. when they do so, you have five minutes to either refuse or grant the request. if you donât respond within five minutes, the request is automatically accepted, in case youâre hurt or otherwise unable to get to your phone. your trusted contacts can also see how recently you used your device.
in other words: if someone genuinely wants to know if youâre okay, they can check the app and see that youâve used your phone five minutes ago, and that can be the end of it. if they want to be doubly sure, or it says you havenât used your phone recently, they can request your location. if you want them to know where you are, or you canât answer, theyâll have your exact location within five minutes. if you donât want them to know where you are, you click deny, and they still see that you got the request and responded to it, meaning, again, they know youâre okay. this is safety with accountability: you canât track someoneâs location without their consent unless they fail to respond to the notification, and you canât do it without them knowing about it.
if you want to track a friend or loved one for genuine safety reasons, set this up. it gives you all the access you need if your concern is actually for the other personâs well-being, rather than a desire for control. (itâs not out for iOS yet, but Google says thatâs coming soon).
(also: donât be the jackass that makes a rule that someone has to accept all your location requests because that makes you just as bad as the people who install tracking shit covertly.)
Itâs not abusive in any way for a parent to want to know where their underage child is and who theyâre talking to, and saying so is a foul misuse of the term âabuseâ.
anyway like I said there is literally no non-abusive reason a person would want the ability to read someoneâs emails, track their location, and go through their calls and text messages without their knowledge or consent
a world where parents are an order of magnitude more dangerous to children than âadults grooming them on the internetâ, and giving parents unchecked powers of surveillance is for that reason alone more likely to put kids at risk than to keep them safe.
I live in this world:
a world where the psychologically debilitating effects of surveillance are well-established and well-known, yet adults do everything in their power to invade young peopleâs privacy and then ask dumbass questions like âwhy are kids so anxious?â and come up with answers like âitâs probably because of selfiesâ
I live in this world:
a world where invasion of privacy is recognized as an integral part of emotional abuse, but parents still get away with it because âtheyâre just doing it to keep them safe uwu~â, despite the fact that this is the same line the goddamn NSA gives us and most of us donât take that sack of lies from them.
tldr, I live in a world where youâre not just wrong, youâre promoting attitudes that are actively harmful and you need to sit down, shut up, and listen when people are trying to educate you about issues of justice and safety.
I swear today's teens are so mentally fucked up it isn't funny. They legit think that fashion styles are genders and that posting your nudes on Onlyfans is a legit career choice and that it's normal to be surrounded by "friends" who will cancel you and ruin your life the moment you say one thing they disagree with and that getting choked out while having sex is normal and that being constantly afraid of social ostracization is just the way friendship works and that businesses using your personal info to control the media and products you are advertized isn't something to worry about.
The Kids are Not Alright and someday we are going to pay the price for letting this happen.
In fandom spaces they're too scared to have a different opinion from their so called 'friends' because they're more frightened of social ostracization so you get these long posts at how sorry they are for not being inclusive enough.
Aren't people getting threatened to lose their jobs for having a different opinion? No one will hire you if businesses so much as see some random user say you're a transphobe or a bigot.
Maybe we should've acted sooner the moment that video "Die cis scum" came out, that shit was foreboding of where things will head.
Your perspective of Gamergate is fascinating because for me, and I think for most, it seemed to be about the most tepid feminist critiques of female representation in games being met with harassment campaigns, death threats, doxxing, swatting, ... That is the phenomenon that got much more traction and attention than whatever justified grievances there might have been about one niche developer. You seem to view the world as if events have an essential and unchangeable core by which they must be judged and which is only ascertainable by studying what is basically a callout-post which even most active participants in what happened next have not actually read.
The thing you think Gamergate was is a lie. It is a lie that was told by a literal and not metaphorical conspiracy to cover up a feminist's abusive behavior.
I can guess you have the same concept of what GG was as everyone else. You go "Some guy made a callout post about his ex, and then somehow by means I don't understand but I am certain don't matter it became a way for contemptible incel nerds to complain about how they hate women." You don't know what actually happened but are confident it doesn't matter. Everyone is. That's why it's important to know.
What happened was some guy (Eron Gjoni) made a callout post about his ex (Zoe Quinn), gamers were laughing at it and mocking her the way they did every other bit of news, but then they noticed that all of their posts about it on various forums were being deleted without comment. All of the people who ran gaming news outlets and forums were on a Yahoo mailing list called GameJournoPros, they didn't like how people were making fun of their friend Zoe Quinn just because she was an inveterate abuser, and so they literally conspired on this mailing list to figure out how they could get gamers to stop talking shit about their friend Zoe Quinn. The method that they decided to use, on this mailing list that was later leaked, was to talk about how gamers were all sexists who hated women and launched harassment campaigns.
I cannot overemphasize this. They decided "We will accuse them of starting a harassment campaign" before it happened. It did not exist, and they committed to saying it existed. The accusations preceded the actions. They did this on a Yahoo mailing list that was later leaked.
As part of this plan cooked up by this literal and not metaphorical conspiracy, 12 different gaming news outlets published articles about hiw "Gamers are over" within 24 hours. It could not have been any more obvious that it was a conspiracy. Which it was. That was a factually true allegation.
That was why it was called "Gamergate." Because, like Watergate, it was a cover-up. The cover-up was Gamergate and where the entirety of it occurred and is what everything came from. It was a very obvious cover-up. And then every single progressive and mainstream news outlet who noticed this said "Oh, a chance to lie about nerds in order to harm them, i have to take that!" They bent over backwards to aid and cover for this literal and not metaphorical conspiracy. All of them. Independently. Chose to join on the side of the liars and abusers.
"It was a bunch of contemptible incels who hate women harassing women because they're upset that women play video games" is a lie. It was a lie they planned out beforehand. And you believe it because every respectable media outlet dutifully repeated the lie until it became the truth. Everyone in GG was constantly being lied to, to our faces, about our own actions and beliefs. The anti-GG clique was caught again and again and again faking threats and harassment and nobody remembered and nobody cared. The reason that people received "outpourings of anonymous gamer hatred" was a botnet operated by the "Crash Override Network," an anti-bullying organization run by Quinn with Randi Lee Haarper and given fawning media coverage all over despite the fact they did nothing but bully others. Their Skype logs where they bullied the shit out of people were leaked, and nobody remembered, and nobody cared. They just kept bullying, they kept lying, they kept abusing, and everyone just nodded along.
When Eron Gjoni posted his callout post, Alec Holowka (creator of Night in the Woods), another ex of Quinn's, said he had gone through similar things when he dated her, that she was abusive, and he should speak up. All his friends in the indie scene and gaming press said he had to keep quiet, because he'd be giving ammo to those evil MRAs, and being a good feminist meant staying quiet. Years later, when Quinn thought people weren't paying enough attention to her, she decided to falsely accuse Holowka of abuse. Despite the fact her Twitter history from that time proved her accusations were false, recording events that are incompatible with how she claimed it happened, all of those same people who told him he had to be quiet about it abandoned him, ostracized him, and drove him to suicide.
All of the people who did this are the scum of the Earth and every progressive media outlet chose to join them and revealed themselves to be scum. A whole cohort of the generation were "radicalized by Gamergate" because they saw how utterly odious and dishonest and shameless the progressive media was, and decided "I will never ever believe or respect any of these people, anything they say, or anything they do, ever again."
sorry man I'm still not over moot's two most unpopular decisions, creating /pol/ and banning gamergate discussions from 4chan, both coming from somebody telling him "hey you should do this" offhandedly
The source of the second is misunderstanding the timeline
He banned discussion of Zoe Quinn from 4chan, along with a bunch of other people banning it from their platforms, and then like a day later 8 sites came out with "gamers are sexist bigots and you shouldn't make things for gamers" stories. The deliberate coverup of the story by multiple outlets acting in a literal and not metaphorical conspiracy was what "Gamergate" was.
this woman had the entire progressive media establishment join in on a literal and not metaphorical conspiracy concocted by all her gaming journalism friends, aimed at defending all of the awful abuse she committed
she was a relentless bully who contributed nothing to the human experience except malicious lies and the social torment of other human beings
one day she decided people weren't paying enough attention to her so she decided to falsely accuse Alec Holowka of abusing her. despite the fact that her accusations were incontrovertibly, provably false, all of her scumbag friends in gaming journalism turned on him and ostracized him and drove him to suicide. Holowka had come to many of these same people after the Zoe Post to tell them that she had abused him during their relationship and he wanted to speak out, and those people who would later abandon, ostracize, and drive him to suicide told him that he had to keep his abuse secret because speaking up would harm feminism by "giving MRA types ammo"
she is genuinely one of the most odious human beings I have ever seen. all of her friends are awful people because you have to be an awful person to do anything aimed at giving her a moment of happiness. she drove a man to suicide, with lies, to get attention. and her utterly irredeemable friends who knew that she was lying and who knew that he was her victim because he had told them years beforehand gleefuly participated in it. this woman was a rockstar of feminism. this woman testified before congress and the UN because she was a rockstar of feminism. everyone lied on her behalf because she was a monstrous abuser in the name of feminism.
to see her laughing about this, to see her friends laughing about this, makes me so viscerally angry in a way I actually literally feel instead of just having to infer about. all of these people should be shunned. their names should be curses. when they die of shame and starvation their corpses should be left in the streets to be picked at by feral dogs. and they are laughing about it. she has never and will never face a single negative consequence for her actions. the entirety of the most powerful ideology in the first world will never stop defending her and the entirety of the progressive media will never stop defending her. oh wow, so crazy, all the things that happened around her! what wacky fun times!
death is the only solace we have from them. all is lost. they cannot ever possibly be defeated and all is lost and death is our only respite.
Idk about that man. The thing about Zoe Quinn is that the only thing she is more of than evil is fucking useless. The bitch has zero talent of any sort, other than that which BPD witchcraft has given her. One day she WILL piss off the wrong person and when that person realizes sheâs being kept around for no fucking reason whatsoever theyâre going to obliterate her. The merciless social milieu she cultivated will turn on her and sheâll be ripped apart by hyenas like Scar from The Lion King
The entirety of feminism and the entirety of the progressive media instantly and with no prior coordination joined lying to protect her. Who the fuck could obliterate her? Who the fuck could have more inherent power-over-others than that? Nobody can form the intent to go after her.
The issue here tho is that Zoe wasn't protected because she's powerful. She was protected because she gave everyone around her an excuse to propagate a narrative that they already wanted to spread.
You can't get ALL of media to go 'we have to protect Zoe Quinn, because very few of them actually know her. But you can create a narrative of 'helpless victim of sexual harassment in video games, all gamers are sexist bigots' and media will spread it, because they ALREADY WANTED TO SPREAD IT.
Zoe Quinn is not a person of power. Zoe Quinn is a beneficiary of systems of power which wanted to solidify their authority by creating an object of hate.
Which is why crushing her is a thing that can happen, but is unlikely TO happen. She can be crushed if she pisses off the wrong person, but she's too small a figure to be noticed or worth that kind of attention. And that last part is excessively easy to prove because nobody knows who the fuck she is, and nobody hears of her for years until she realises she's nobody and has to stick her head out to claim a position of notority.
To the literal point of admitting that Gamergate was in fact right, and she created the exact conspiracy everyone accused her of, because she felt it was unfair that Epstein was getting credited for /Pol/.
Stop abusing your boyfriends and yes what you are doing is abuse.
Stop:
Yelling at him in front of his friendsÂ
Hitting or slapping him when he does or says something you donât like
Telling him he doesnât have a choice when it comes to decisions that involve both of youÂ
Telling him he canât hang out with friends because you donât like him
Telling him to not talk to other girls even if they are his friend
Forcing him to spend every moment with youÂ
Belittling him and pointing out all his flaws
Calling him stupid or making fun of him for making a mistake
Threatening to break up with him if he doesnât do what you want
Being emotionally manipulative and crying until he does what you want
Accusing him of cheating every time heâs not with you
Blow up is phone if he doesnât text you every five minutesÂ
Telling him you are the must thing that has ever happened to him and no one else will love
Physically attacking him when ever you are mad
Forcing him to have sex despite that fact that he said he didnât want to
Invading his privacy by going through his phone
Getting mad at him for changing his password and demanding he tell you what it is
If a guy did any of these things to a girl it would be considered abuse but since its the other way around its considered normal. Throughout High school I saw many girl treating their boyfriends like shit. Sometime even physically abusing them in the hallways and no one trying to stop it because its a girl attacking a boy.Â
Boys: If your girlfriend does anything on this list leave her. It is abuse and you deserve better.
Girls: if you find your self doing anything on this list to your boyfriend you need to knock it off because you are being abusive.Â
Being passive aggressive with him when he wants to spend time with friends or doing other thingsÂ
controlling when heâs able to go out with friends
Breaking up his friendships with other girls just because youâre insecure
Making him feel like his opinions in decisions that affect the both of you are irrelevant and donât matter
SENDING HIS NUMBER TO STRANGERS TO TEST IF HEâS LOYAL OR NOT
testing him in anyway in general without his knowledge or permission (example: catfishing! itâs manipulative and weird donât fucking do that)
taking money/credit cards without permission to spend on things without his knowledge ( had an ex friend do this constantly to her boyfriend and sheâd always condone it because âheâll get over itâ )
guilting him for hanging out with friends/family over you  and making him choose between you and friends/family
telling him âyou donât love me if you *insert harmless activity he wants to do here* â
being rude or mean to him in front of others to assert dominance or power over him
downloading apps to spy on his phone activity (yes, this is a thing ââregularââ people do) or snooping on his social media to see who heâs talking to
hitting him, slapping him, punching him, shoving him. literally how do people not understand slapping your male partner is bad. people tend to find this funny in media and society and its weird. KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF YOUR PARTNER WITHOUT PERMISSION.Â
I come from a family of very forward and manipulative women and i see it in media all the time. itâs fucked and people need to not be accepting of young girls acting like snot-nosed, abusive shit heads that think they can get away with manipulation and cruelty because they happen to be girls.
and let me add this. ABUSIVE TEEN GIRLFRIENDS TURN INTO ABUSIVE GROWN ASS WOMEN GIRLFRIENDS WHO TURN INTO ABUSIVE WIVES.
if you have an abusive teen or young adult gf right now fellas, leave. donât let her use you to get her shit right. youâll be so fucked up by the time she gets it together if she ever does and believe that most likely she wonât. Â
Women/young girls can definitely be just as abusive. I knew a young man that got ran over and had his leg broken by his girlfriend because (in her words he annoyed her) He refused to press charges. Another young lady started to hit her ex boyfriend because he wouldnât take her back because of the abuse. He called the cops on her and they literally started laughing at him because she was very petite in comparison to him. Anyone can be abusive and I wish more people understood that.
i donât know exactly how to say this in a way that comes across clearly, but i am obsessed with the idea of depicting m/f relationships in a way where the hype isnât all on the manâs love of the woman, and how swoonworthy it is and how powerful. (this has been on my mind an awful lot lately because lost loves to lean on this, especially in season six. itâs also something that often grates on me about the officeâs depiction of jim and pam even though iâm very fond of jim and pam.) i really want to see women being active in the relationship too, rather than just being the object to be pursued or worshiped or cherished or whatever the heck! not in a way that depicts women going out of their way for men who donât reciprocate, which i think is always the go-to assumption when you talk about this kind of portrayal of a relationship. but i love the idea of women being able to make romantic gestures and acts of great love toward their male love interests in a way that is, like, considered cool and iconic in the way that so many male charactersâ romantic actions toward their ladies are cool and iconic. idk how to say it. like, something that goes beyond âis this woman being honored nobly enough by her man, which is the sum total of all romance?â i want the women participating tooooooooo! WHY NOT!
Iâm just gonna drop an excerpt from the linked Reddit thread that hits hard:
The Male Romantic Fantasy
Iâd say that men usually feel most loved when this normal state of affairs is negated; when they are made to believe that a womanâs love is not conditional in the cause-and-effect manner described in the parent post. Love is work for men, but it can be rewarding work when things are going smoothly and the woman is happy as a result. But the male romantic fantasy is to be shown that the woman feels the same way and stands by him when heâs down on his luck, when the moneyâs not there, or when heâs not feeling confident. He wants to know that the love he believes heâs earned will stay even when the actions that feed it wane (however temporarily). A good woman can often lift a man up in his times of need and desperation and weather the storm even when things arenât going well. The male romantic fantasy is an enduring and unconditional love that seems to defy this relationship of labor and reward. A man wants to be loved for who he is, not for what he does in order to be loved.
An interesting way to examine this is to look at what women often call romantic entitlement. An entitled guy is a dude who maintains an unrealistic notion of menâs typically active role in love. Before acknowledging reality, this boy uncompromisingly believes that he shouldnât have to do anything or change anything about himself to earn a womanâs love; he wants to be loved for who he is, not what he does.
All men secretly want this, but there comes a day when they eventually compromise out of necessity. After that day, they may spend years honing themselves, working, shaping themselves into the men they believe women want to be chosen by. A massive part of what causes boys to âgrow upâ is the realization that being loved requires hard work. This impetus begins a journey where a boy grows into a man by gaining strength, knowledge, resources, and wisdom. The harsh realities of the world might harden and change him into a person his boyhood self wouldnât recognize. He might adopt viewpoints he doesnât agree with, transgress his personal boundaries, or commit acts he previously thought himself incapable of. But ultimately, the goal is to feel as if his work is done.
When he can finally let go of the crank he continually turns day after day in order to earn love and, even if only for a moment, it turns by itself to nourish him in return, that is when he will know he is loved.
They couldn't codify Roe v Wade into law despite having super majorities in the House and Senate and the Supreme Court and a sitting president, multiple times.
They're not gonna give you universal healthcare
They're not going to institute green energy laws that exclude oil and gas.
They're just going to enslave you and make you thank them for the collar.
They sat on forgiving student loans when they had both houses of congress and the white house because they wanted to use that as a carrot to hold on to power and buy votes and when it didn't work and they lost congress they tried to make it out that they tried when biden overstepped his authority as president even though they all knew the president doesn't have that power.
They did not extend the eviction moratorium even though they held both houses and the white house.
The main thing they did was say they wanted to do things they knew they didn't have the power or authority to do and then blame the other side for stopping them.
Which honestly works for both parties, which is why people need to stop voting for a party, they only care about power, find a candidate you can vote FOR not against.
This place is going to keep going downhill if people can't figure that out.
It is more profitable to promise to defend a thing than it is to actually make the changes that defend the thing.
As long as (cause) is in danger, people will donate money to you to defend (cause). And if your inaction results in things getting worse? Well, that's all the more proof that money is needed for (cause)!
This is not a course of action that was agentically chosen to maximize profit.
The Democratic Party are very, very bad at doing things. They're so sclerotic that they prevent themselves from doing anything, because doing something might alienate one of The Groups.
I think 'Is it agentic' is entirely the wrong way to frame it entirely. One doesn't have to go out of your way to deny that a thing needs to be a priority, it just comes from NOT thinking of the thing as a priority. If you decide that there doesn't need to be more funding for new schools this quarter, you don't then have to think of it every time a budget comes up. It just becomes a thing you consider less than other things you could be doing with funds.
In a similar way, promising to make a law to legalized abortion is a big thing to trot out in front of the campaign and makes you a lot of money. BUT! It's politically risky. You can put it as a low priority because solving it is something you can do in an optimal situation and would please your constituents, but you can push the risk off to another time. After all, it's not like any challenge against Roe V Wade has made any headway...
Yes it does, in the campaign phase. If your constituents BELIEVE you consider it a high priority, they will fund you for it. It benefits you to make them believe it's a priority, because they will give you money to deal with 'big important issue'.
You profit off of the paranoia about the issue, even if things grow worse, but there's no PRIORITY to fix the issue, because there's no urgency on YOUR part to 'fix' it. The threat of repeal is a benefit to you, but avoiding that threat isn't a priority because again, it's a benefit to you.
You don't have to go so far as to block efforts to fix the problem, you just don't have to prioritize efforts to fix it.
It's not about creating a false cause to rally people around for fundraising. The issue's been out there for decades with pro-life people pushing to end Roe V Wade for a long time. It's just very easy for a situation like that to develop into 'there's more profit in pledging change than there is in bringing about change' and that's not even a new concept, it's one that plagues charities world-wide.
hey. if someone tries to smear you on the internet for something asinine, what you need to do is block every single person engaging with the post and remind yourself that absolutely under no circumstances are you obligated to draft a PR response defending some out-of-context screenshot or kink fanfiction or thing you said when you were 15 or whatever put your blood in the water. you are not a public figure or a brand. you do not have to respond to something if you know in your heart it is bullshit.
Lots of good advice in the link above, but the one line that really sticks out to me: Donât try to satisfy a public that is setting out not to be satisfied.
All of the article is good, but I want to highlight this part in particular:
This has, more or less, been the case of pretty much every fandom space I've been in that's attempted to do some sort of Call To Action against a community member.
Even in cases where the reasons have been clearly listed, they either tend to bend the argument being made about the "poor behavior" in question, or undermine the overarching point they're trying to make by creating a grocery list of crimes and trespasses (that are typically less about informing people, and more about overwhelming and confusing anyone reading).
And none of this gets into how so many of these harassment campaigns employ DARVO against their targets to further ostracize them (and anyone associated with them) from participating in the community.
One of the most baffling moments of harassment ive ever gotten was when I said that all those copy pasted inbox messages claiming to be from Gaza hit every single red flag for an internet scam with researched links about how many of them are from the US, and how GFM doesnt have bandwidth in Palestine, etc, and then in a few weeks people in the notes had taken the trouble to look up my pronouns to accurately tell me in excruciating detail how they wanted me to kill myself.
It was so fascinating from a psychological perspective. You do this horrible, unforgivable thing of telling a complete stranger neutrally pointing out the red flags in something theyre concerned about that they deserve to die a horrific and violent death, and before you do that you do the research to accurately he/him him. It showed this fascinating conflict between what they thought of themselves (Good People who make sure to be Trans Allies) and their outward actions (people who wish death upon others for challenging their pre-conceived ideas of the world. Objectively the actions of horrible people)
I really dont know what to say to that and I still dont lmao, but it haunts me to this day
No youre hitting another fundamental side to this behavior: you can quell your own insecurity towards your unconscious knowledge that you are the type of person who sends people death threats for challenging your preconceived notions by cherry-picking ways to show your supposed allyship. Its easy to say all the right words to technically not misgender a trans man while you harass him, thereby establishing yourself to others perception as someone who has a moral principle to uphold trans allyship even against those who are One Of The Bad Ones. When you are inevitably put before your own machine of internet harassment when you step out of line, you can point out how youve, for example, never misgendered someone. But that doesnt change whats fundamentally rotten and disgusting about you as a person: that you are the type of person who sends people death threats for challenging your preconceived notions. What they dont understand is that there is no amount of performative allyship that will change that rotten part of you
âmiddle aged women shouldnât participate in fandomâ and you think itâs teenagers that are writing those brilliant, incisive 100k fics of your favourite characters
I think itâs worth adding although kids are parroting it, the roots of this stuff is less ageism in general and more misogyny. Itâs never applied to men. In 2000s fan culture you still saw the same targeted exclusion of middle aged women participating in fandom, but instead of a 14 year old bakugo pfp with a half-mile DNI list it was coming from men of all ages.
Fan participation in men of all ages is praised and normalized, and at worst ignored, but never really shamed (with some exceptions like adult men into mlp), but for women being allowed in fan culture at all cuts off around mid 30s or so to these people. Itâs ultimately that men get viscerally upset over women enjoying and enriching their lives for themselves rather than having kids/marrying, because in their minds that is the sole purpose of a woman of that age and her doing anything else with her life is borderline criminal in their heads. Thatâs why you only see this exclusion applied to women, why the same tweens saying this will turn around and foam at the mouth for 30+ y/o male gaming YouTubers and the like. These internalized and normalized sentiments are being parroted
Also âmen do fanart/etc not fanfictionâ notice fanfiction is the only form of fan contribution constantly assigned a sense of shame/âcringeâ yet also the only form of fanwork dominated by women.
Not wrong for the most part, but it isnât as simple as men in fandoms being praised and at worst ignored.
Depending on the fandom, men who participated were nerdy, obsessive basement-dwelling weirdos at best and pedophiles/sexual predators at worst. Not to mention, women in fandom are by in large attacked by teens and other women whereas men in fandoms just tend to stay in their own lane and leave each other alone minus a mutual shit-throwing contest.
When it comes to how people foam at the mouth for guys like Markiplier or dudes who do Minecraft and other similar games, they arenât looked at as fandom participants. Theyâre looked at as accessible, minor celebrities. There is an intense parasocial relationship there between them and their young(er) audience. Not to mention, itâs helped by the fact that the gaming YouTubers are in some way attractive or if theyâre faceless, their fans fantasize about how attractive they are combined with the fact that theyâre making content for the audience.
Whereas with fanart, fanfiction, etc. the parasocial relationship is lacking. Theyâve been gaslit into thinking that fiction, fandoms, etc. are some form of political activism that you need to do ârightâ because of people who prey on teenage rebellion and desire for justice but not lacking the wisdom to know where evil originates from. Itâs why they call people any kind of x-phobic over ships, fiction, etc.
And because the parasocial relationship of idol or celebrity status is missing, they target them thinking that theyâre doing some moral good in the world. Not to mention, older people in fandom tend to make the content they, themselves, want to see and not what these tweens and teenagers want to see. Because they arenât making content for tweens and teenagers, theyâre deserving of criticism because they arenât as accessible as the 30-year-old gaming YouTuber who makes content for them. Theyâre old enough to know what they want, but not wise enough to navigate the fact that not everything revolves around them and their personal tastes.
Factor in the fact that itâs usually other women participating in these attacks too and well it isnât as simple as thinking women should only be having children. In my experience and casual observation, most men in fandom tend to just stay in their own lane. Of course, you have those who attack women for just participating because theyâre misogynistic, but their attacks are distinctly different from it being pedophilic, x-phobic, fetishizing, etc. They just go straight for and stick to the misogyny. There are very few if any moral or social justifications behind it like âprotecting MLMâ or âprotecting childrenâ, etc.
In short, the 30-year-old gaming youtubers get a âpassâ because theyâre not looked at as fandom participants. Theyâre looked at as if theyâre minor celebrities who make content for an audience whereas women in fandom who make for themselves are not as accessible and then you just combine that with being gaslit into thinking fandom participation is a form of activism.
It would actually depend entirely on what definition you used
If you said there were Chinese spies in the Senate that would be wacky
If you said there were Chinese spies working for Senators, the answer is "yeah, probably a few"
If you said "the mayor of a town of 50k people is a Chinese spy" the response would be "I guess, i'm not sure it would even be that beneficial to China to do that but if so they've got a lot of potential takers."
Well, the city she was mayor of was Arcadia, part of the suburbs of Los Angeles. If your job is to be a listening post, I'd say it's well-situated to know a lot of stuff.
Eileen Wang, now the former mayor of the City of Arcadia, agreed to plead guilty to one felony charge that she acted as an illegal foreign a
Eftimiades said China is carrying out a "whole of society approach." Unlike Western intelligence agencies, which focus espionage efforts on other intelligence organizations or militaries, China also focuses on spying at a societal level, he explained. "That means that they're recruiting mayors and congressmen with the hope that they'll rise into greater positions."
Once in place, he said the idea is that these leaders could carry out a range of operations on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party, including spying on members of the Chinese diaspora who are perceived as dissidents or monitoring the activities of visiting Taiwanese leadership.
For example, federal prosecutors say Yaoning "Mike" Sun, who worked with Wang on the website and as her campaign advisor, closely surveilled the then-president of Taiwan when she visited the area in 2023.
"insert your preferred candidates at the local level and wait for leadership positions to open up" is one way to play the soft power game, i guess
It also makes sense considering their policy of social credit. When you want to push influence on people, it is far more effective to make it from those around them rather than from the top-down. And if one internalizes that approach from every level, it makes more sense to go for minor roles one can use for soft influence rather than major roles that get more attention.
After all, you don't need to get an agent into Congress if you can get one to spend time with Eric Swalwell. Hell, it's even better that way because pointing out that their relationship is hinky can be treated as an example of racism.
Men: this movies cinematography was way off. The characters were impossible to connect with and the action scenes were just not realistic. I will say a bunch of big words to hide my sexism behind and so you think I'm right and so so smart.
Women: This isnât good female representation, this is pandering. The heroine is a typical high school mean girl and thinks being a girlboss is peak feminism. The writers clearly wanted to write a strong woman before writing a good character or a story. If this is how all women are supposed to be, Iâm offended.
People like OP: Shut up pick me! Dick worshipper! What, are you trying to be not like other girls?? Heâs not going to text you back! Thereâs a special place in hell for women who donât support other women!
I'm stuck remembering how the original Charlie's Angels did so well... and the third film in the 'series' did so badly. And it absolutely wasn't for the concept that people hated the concept of heroic women.
Ghostbusters 2016 failed to capture it's audience, and while people try and blame sexism, it's a thing where it was overtly done as a Line-o-rama film as opposed to the original's well written script.
Sexism is just a very handy excuse to wave away the results of poorly made films. And it's not like it's a trait unique to female-lead series! There's a SHITTON of crappy films with male leads in them! Just people don't try and deflect from the criticism!
I was raised by my grandparents. Every year I was told I absolutely have to get the flu shot. Teachers, doctors, pretty much every adult in authority was telling me I need to do it for my grandparents because it'll make sure that not only will I not get sick but I won't get them sick either. If the elderly get the flu it can really fuck em up.
So every year I got the shot and every year I got sick anyway. The answer was "bummer you must have gotten the wrong strain". After all, there's a bunch of new strains every year and it's not possible to make enough vaccines for everyone to be immune to all of them. They need to make an educated guess what areas will get hit hardest by what strains and plan accordingly.
Then covid hit and we got the exact same spiel. Take the shots and you'll be completely immune. You won't pass it on to others! It wasn't just some politician who doesn't know better or some random millennial that follows IFL Science. Actual doctors were telling us the covid shots would work that way. People tried to implement vaccine passports to force people to get it. Biden mandated that OSHA force everyone to get the shots or else. People were demanding that people who don't get the shots be put in camps or shot. There were a million other proposed ideas out there all on the basis that the experts promised us that it would grant immunity and stop the spread of the disease.
It didn't work like that. For weeks they kept moving the goal posts. You just got infected a few days before your second dose took full effect. It still works. It's just a few rare break through cases. It still works. It's actually a new strain of covid. It still works on the original virus.
Finally they changed the narrative. Vaccines don't work like that. They never worked like that. Are you stupid? What even gave you the idea they work like that? Everybody knows it just reduces your symptoms so you don't get as sick.
A year or two later they changed the narrative on the flu shot. It doesn't really make you immune. You just won't get as sick.
There's no way in hell it took some 70 years of vaccines being in common use for doctors to realize that vaccines don't work the way they promised. Even if it was possible it's very telling the way they acted like this was common knowledge. In 2021 I didn't see one doctor say that everyone is grossly misunderstanding how vaccines work.
Science doesn't lie but scientists and doctors will lie for a paycheck.
it's sorta wild how much people will cheer on e.g. a woman damaging her boyfriend's property because he cheated on her when if a man did that in response to his girlfriend cheating we'd all recognize it as completely unhinged.
but i think it's wrong to frame this as a "men's rights issue" mostly because i don't think the ideal world is one where we also let the vengeful boyfriend exact vigilante justice for unfaithfulness!
if anything it seems more misogynistic than misandrist to excuse a woman for something we'd hold a man accountable for, it's like they're treating the vengeful girlfriend as less of an autonomous adult; they don't expect her to behave because to them she's only kind of a person. they think her boyfriend should have known better than to cheat because to them he's a full-fledged member of society while she's a child. meanwhile in their eyes the girl who cheats on her boyfriend is just a kid who doesn't know any better; they feel the boyfriend should reign himself in and be the mature person in the situation when dealing with someone beneath him.
This post is morbidly funny because you are capable of understanding that people's opinions and behavior are in the wrong here, but you can't bring yourself to the conclusion "men are human, they are moral subjects whose lives and wellbeing are worthy of consideration" so you have to add epicycles about how akschually it's harmful for the woman.
