#<- this is so those ppl dont interact w this

[not-yet-so-broken]

5) really? you would YELL at them the way you yelled at this anon?

when a rape victims of men speak up about their horrible treatment, you say "OK WELL victims of women are told this and this and this and this"? you do that just the same, with same tone, same trying to make them sound malicious and overdramatic, same launching into a rant about different victims?

be so fucking for real.

look again HOW you wrote it lol. you did not approach this from a place of comforting victims so dont pretend you did it to reach out. This was not about the comfort of "most people refuse to endorse such beliefs" and having honest discussion about that.

This was about shutting us up and putting us in our place. You said yourself "Both you and the Anon are repeating the sexist idea that female abusers supported by society more than male abusers". So this was your preconception from the very beginning lol... anyone that even MENTIONS female rapists is evil histrionic MRA that should be shouted at more by enlightened and unbiased ppl such as yourself.

i already have like 6 anons from ur followers telling me im lucky and not really raped and a "obvious histrionic exaggerator trying to co-opt victimhood" lol. this is the shit i mean wow so progressive. so surprising those ppl are the ones that agree w ur response and feel encouraged with your "WELL ALL VICTIMS SUFFER SO SHUT UP" obvious hostile response lol.

and im not saying ur endorsing the anons i got. but there is a reason they are comfortable w your stance and HOW you respond to us. there is a reason they feel cheered when u respond that way with that hostility and that assumption. bc it still silences us just like they want lol.

6) that was definitely the exact anon ask we were discussing when you told me i shouldn't assume they were rape apologists and i should give them the benefit of the doubt. almost all your interactions are from anon lol what else would we have been discussing. believe me or dont idc.

anyway if you're victimized by a woman, you don't have to shut up about it, you dont have to put a million disclaimers about how other victims have it just as bad or worse, you don't have to be polite to ppl that respond to your assault with obvious agendas or bias, you dont have to downplay it to make others comfortable.

"Obviously, no one is trying to "invalidate" these female-on-female victims or ignore female perpetrators."

wrong

ppl repeatedly insist female-on-female victims are just stupid and ignorant and all the problems are in their head lol

lots of your buddies openly say female-on-female is not even rape and nbd, and have even send harassing messages to victims of women that speak up about their experiences

go spend some time telling them how much you hate them for that instead of lecturing victims on how female perps are a total non-issue

I'm guessing this is in response to this post where I challenge an individual who is misrepresenting statistics in an attempt to suggest that women are similarly victimized by women as they are by men? The person who is suggesting that women who want to form male-free spaces are being unreasonable and bigoted for recognizing the fact that the vast majority of perpetrators of violence against women are men and desiring a space they can be free from that?

With that context:

"ppl repeatedly insist female-on-female victims are just stupid and ignorant and all the problems are in their head lol"

Okay, and people repeatedly insist that male-on-female victims deserve to be raped for "acting/dressing like a slut". Or that most of them are just liars out for revenge or "crying rape" because they're regretting consensual sex. Or that men have a right to sex from his girlfriend or wife, so it's not really rape if they're in a relationship or if it is, then the girlfriend/wife deserved it for "withholding" sex. (Or that the girlfriend/wife is being abusive for "withholding" sex.)

They say women should know better than to go out alone or drink at a bar or go to parties, and then they ridicule women who only go out in groups or don't drink or don't go to parties. They say teenage girls are "tricking" grown men into having sex and tell little girls that the boys who are assaulting them "just have a crush".

They call women dramatic, faking liars for crying during testimony or cold, lying bitches if they don't.

All of which is to say, that people on the internet are cruel and their vitriol is not directed at any one specific perpetrator-victim dynamic. Their cruelty changes shape, but the presence does not.

And, if you're curious, I do actually have some research on this:

While this is primarily about male vs female victims, it also shows women do not differ in male vs female perpetrator support. (Men – but not women – do report more favorable views of female-on-male perpetrators, although in absolute terms "degrees of victim blame and perpetrator support were low across all conditions".)

I supported these results by more sources in this post.

And for online posts specifically, I discuss in this post, how overall victim blaming/perpetrator support was more prevalent in online spaces than in research samples (and some possible reasons why). I also discuss how there were similar levels of victim blaming for both male and female victims. In fact, female perpetrators were explicitly condemned more often than male perpetrators (although possible confounding factors urge caution in generalizing this). And perhaps most important: many of the female-perpetrator-supporting comments were overtly sexualizing, suggesting they were mainly left by other men.

Now, wait, you may say, all of this research is focused on male-on-female, male-on-male, and female-on-male cases.

And, yes, that is true. There is little work on female-on-female cases specifically, likely because they are uncommon. Specifically, research suggests that solo-female sexual offenders (i.e., offenders who do not co-offend with another – usually male – person) usually assault male victims. Female offenders who victimize female victims are more likely to be co-offenders with a male accomplice [1-3].

All available research indicates that female offenders are condemned to similar degrees as male offenders. (Mostly in general, but also particularly by women.)

"lots of your buddies openly say female-on-female is not even rape and nbd, and have even send harassing messages to victims of women that speak up about their experiences"

So, a few things:

I do not consider people on this site "buddies" because I rarely, if ever, actually talk to anyone. Most of my interaction with other people on this site is via anonymous asks.

See the above section for similar examples of vitriol aimed at female victims of male perpetrators.

None of this is meant to imply such statements/harassment are "okay". I am simply pointing out that victims from every demographic face similar issues.

Harassment is not okay, and I have never suggested it is.

"go spend some time telling them how much you hate them for that instead of lecturing victims on how female perps are a total non-issue"

Anon, providing factually accurate information about male violence and correcting sexist misinformation is not "lecturing victims" or suggesting female perpetrators are a "total non-issue".

Explaining that the vast majority of violence against women is enacted by men is not excusing the violence that is enacted by women. As I said many times the last time this topic came up, "something doesn’t need to be common to deserve sympathy and rare =/= excusable”.

And the fact that you have interpreted my post in this way, that you are implying that I somehow expressed "hate" for female-on-female victims, when nothing in my posts has suggested this makes me wonder what the posts you described above (e.g., saying "female-on-female is not even rape") actually say. (In other words, how am I to trust your reading of these posts when you have demonstrated such a poor interpretation of mine?)

Conclusion

Most people, when asked in a research setting, endorse low levels of victim-negative and/or perpetrator-positive sentiments. These levels are somewhat higher on the internet, which may indicate either that people in research settings are conforming to a social desirability bias or people with more extreme opinions are more likely to post on social media.

Support for female and male victims is similar, as is condemnation of male and female perpetrators. Higher levels of victim blame for male victims and/or female perpetrators appear to come primarily from men – not women. There is little research on female-on-female incidents, likely because many of these involve co-offenders which are difficult to compare to solo offender incidents.

Correcting misinformation about female perpetrators is not an expression of support. Suggesting otherwise does not do you any favors.

References under the cut:

Augarde, S., & Rydon-Grange, M. (2022). Female perpetrators of child sexual abuse: A review of the clinical and empirical literature–A 20-year update. Aggression and violent behavior, 62, 101687.

Wijkman, M., Bijleveld, C., & Hendriks, J. (2010). Women don’t do such things! Characteristics of female sex offenders and offender types. Sexual Abuse, 22(2), 135-156.

Vandiver, D. M. (2006). Female Sex Offenders: A Comparison of Solo Offenders and Co-Offenders. Violence and Victims, 21(3), 339–354. doi:10.1891/vivi.21.3.339

[theautisticfroglord]

anyways parents who record/post their autistic child having a meltdown are awful people :)

[ecrireverie]

okay lol mini rant in the tags sorry i just HAD to get this off my chest 😭 sorry if this is very incoherent and poorly worded or structured or whatever i'm just. pretty out of it and i cannot really think to write this properly. well, that or i am probably just illiterate actually. Yeah that's it lol

[fenkko]

cant believe i reached 30 tags in prev post rambling about homestuck i didnt even know there was a limit

[quillkiller]

people have to stop acting like they’re oppressed because people are being annoying and/or mean about their otps

[habibisagi]

the 0 notes on nearly every post i make will not drive me off this app and stop me from making them continuously. this i assure you <3

[xmoonlitxdreamx]

forgot to include lifeweaver in my weird little name/nickname chart i posted a while ago, so i came up w this. tbh these guys are more like a trio to me than when i draw the junkers w the ow members (where i tend to focus on junkrat)

[chironsbug]

can i be so honest i Hope j&d have me muted on twitter

[3416]

Wait what’s the issue even like are they not allowed to just have 3 As? Pittsburgh had like 8 As a few years back

according to the 23-24 rulebook, only 1 c and 2 a's or no c and 3 a's can be present on the ice and on the scoresheet for the game. as for whether a team can HAVE more, they can. the leafs have had one extra a since 2019 and auston and mitch took turns rotating it barring injury or mo or jt. i believe the rangers rn have 1 cap and 4 a's. i do think just continuously adding a's makes things a bit ridiculous bc like... more ppl can show leadership in the room than need an a, lol. i like the leafs group rn, i just think ppl arguing over the technicality of WHEN ppl can wear it is stupid as hell. it's not a real problem.

[dandyshucks]

also I got rly scared abt this last night or the night before because I suddenly realized sometimes people interpret it this way,,

so i just wanted to say that the reason i dont interact w people very much is NOT bc i think im better than ppl or anything - i am just very genuinely Petrified of messing up in social situations, to the point that I end up isolating and avoiding rather than risk making mistakes ^^;; WHICH ISN'T HEALTHY but . i havent figured out how to work through this yet dhdjdkl

BUT YEAH i just wanted to try to make sure nobody is thinking I'm some hoity-toity goober, I am literally just Extremely Terrified fjdjdkdl

[agayconcept]

.

[badnikbreaker]

none of u are ready for the roleswap im cookin up

[homophyte]

can i be so honest. every critique ive read of nope so far has been very lacking

[goldevolution]

and as much as i love it when random happenings turn into important bonds i think its equally as beautiful when u have some random interaction with someone and it deeply impacts u and then u never see or hear of them again. like wow we know nothing abt each other and yet u still managed to be a key memory in my life how cool is that!!!!!!

[quenthel]

that being said using canon stuff to shut down other ppl's ideas or hounding what is and isnt true within the story too much is also cruel and stupid. like in the end of the day these are stories that are told for some kind of purpose. like does x little detail add anything substantial to what the story is abt? many times that question will be no yet ppl treat that information as it would be like a real life undisputable event... also this ties into how many ppl interact w fiction and fictional character like they would w real life events and people lol

[waywardsalt]

not to be That Kind of zelda fan but the hyrule historia does also explicitly refer to the world of the ocean king as ‘another world’