#Anon Hate

[teaboot]

I LOOOVE how fucking stupid you are. queer is used as a slur just like faggot, tranny (of which i am both), among others. Just because you want to be called queer or don't see an issue with jt doesn't magically mean it doesn't still negatively hurt people all over the world. If someone called me a faggot to my face I'd be fine but if someone called me a queer I'd explode their testicles. I hope this helps you fucking moron

Do you ever just look at the stars

[injuries-in-dust]

cunt

That's it?

That's the best you can do?

Internet bullies aren't even trying anymore.

It's less anon hate and more anon mild-dislike.

[chanaleah]

the goyaudacity

[marzipanandminutiae]

If someone corrects you on your misinformation you should probably not turn around and act like a snobbish jackass in response, just a suggestion!

I have exactly zero clues what this is about, but I'll...try not to? Thanks for the tip? I generally endeavor not to do that, though of course nobody is perfect?

[nyancrimew]

Why do u call yourself a transGIRL if you are over 18? That's pedophilic .

this one is always sooo funny to me, cause like ok, when some random cis woman calls herself or her friend a girl or something she's quirky and cool, but when a trans person calls themselves a girl or a boy we're suddenly pedophiles! hmmmm i wonder where that rhetoric comes from?

[random-fun-polls]

hey can you do a poll that asks if you’ve ever received hate anon mail? Thanks

[lycandrophile]

pinnochio! 🫵🤣 you will never be a real boy!

i mean pinnochio did become a real boy. that was a pretty significant part of the story. i understand that you’re just being transphobic but pinnochio did very much become a real boy.

[the-muppet-joker]

Your uncle said you peed your pants, is it true?

stop

[insanelyadd]

Using this anon hate I got as a teaching example

So if you get anon hate like this, there is a few things you can do. (Also once again the person linked is totally innocent, anon is just using a link to them for some reason, do not bother them)

First of all, Tumblr made it so only people who have accounts and are logged in can send anons AT ALL. So if you want to you can click the three little dots in the upper right corner and report them

Anyways once you're there, select the type of harassment you're getting, after consulting a few people on discord I decided it was the second to last one.

Then of course you fill out the little form

Afterwards you can hit "Submit and Block"

Fun fact: when you block an anon you permanently (there is no way to reverse it) block their IP address and they can't send you any more anons, also as a bonus, if you've received a LOT of anon hate and then you block one of them, reload your inbox to see how many it got rid of, because it might have just been one loser spamming you. If you don't feel like reporting them then that's fine too, just block those suckers.

And finally, you can take solace in the fact that you could never be as big of a loser as the anons sending people hate.

[basilpaste]

You're genuinely not as kind or nice as you might think you are

no one is as good or as bad as they think they are, people are biased little creatures. i dont even think im particularly nice? im quick to anger and kind of petty.

but heres the thing: i try to be.

when someone puts the effort in to try to be decent to others, that reflects back on how others see them. something about that golden rule, huh? treat others how you want them to treat you.

maybe you could learn a thing or two about that !

[jewish-microwave-laser]

maybe stop committing genocide if you don't want the shit rightfully beat out of you. How many Palestinians have you murdered again?

oh shit you got me. i, personally, have killed probably 10,000 palestinians from my home in kentucky. i'm actually personal friends with benyamin netanyahu, too, he comes to our kabbalat shabbat services regularly on his private jet or something. he also always makes sure to bring fresh christian babies' blood for us to use in the matzah we eat every shabbat afternoon. damn, i really thought i was hiding it

[read-marx-and-lenin]

Was it antifascist when the USSR only ever allowed less than 10% of the population to vote for the one candidate the dictatorship put forward for each role?

Why did you deactivate your last account? Were you upset that you looked so foolish? You don't look any less foolish creating multiple alternate accounts to send anon hate with. I don't even have anon asks turned off.

The Soviet Union had universal suffrage. Every voting-age adult was allowed to participate in the elections, besides felons and those who were incapable of voting due to mental disability. All ballots were secret (at least, after 1936. Oftentimes elections prior were done by show of hands, but this became problematic.)

If you are referring to the election of the Presidium or the appointment of the Premier by the elected representatives of the Supreme Soviet, I would consider that more democratic than the election of the President of the United States, since not only was the Presidium a council of multiple people in and of itself instead of one singular person at the head of the government, but the election of the Presidium was undertaken by representatives who were directly elected by the people, as opposed to the electors of the Electoral College in the United States who are appointed by party officials.

If you are referring to the election of the General Secretary of the Communist Party by Communist party members, then that position was not a governmental one. While the General Secretary did indeed have significant political influence due to their role as leader of the vanguard party, they were not a dictator and the position did not confer any state powers.

Not only were the Supreme Soviet and the Presidium composed of many different people who collectively decided upon state actions, many powers and duties were constitutionally delegated to regional councils and soviets. The federal government never held supreme power.

As for the idea that there was only "one candidate" for office during elections, the so-called "single-slate ticket" decried by the West, it betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about how communist politics works. Competitive tickets were not impossible, although party discipline prevented them from occurring at any high level. Rather, the single-slate ticket arose because prior to the printing of any ballots, there was a period of discussion to determine who would be the candidate in the first place. So it was not a case of people being told by the party "here is your candidate, now you must vote for them". The people and the party worked together to find candidates who had public support in the first place. In addition, not only could voters simply vote "no" and reject a candidate (and any candidate who did not receive a majority of "yes" votes would be rejected,) but all elected officials were subject to recall at any time if they were found to be deficient in their responsibilities by the electorate. Candidates were not forced on the Soviet people by faceless party bureaucrats.

If you want to know more, I recommend checking out "Soviet Democracy" by Pat Sloan (I should note that that particular work forms most of my knowledge on Soviet democracy, so take all of that with a grain of salt for anything past 1937 when the book was written) and pretty much anything written by Anne Louise Strong, although I would recommend "In North Korea", in particular Chapter 3 which goes into detail on pre-war DPRK elections and includes a very enlightening passage on how the North Korean voters at the time viewed single-slate tickets. Suffice it to say, they did not at all feel disenfranchised.

I can understand why you would be misinformed as to how the Soviet government worked. But to decry the Soviet Union as undemocratic, let alone fascistic, is absurd.

[weiszklee]

Here's a PSA: Remember that it is always correct to delete anon hate. Don't let them have the satisfaction of getting a rise out of you. Don't try to be funny. Just hit delete and move on.

[chanaleah]

Today I got an ad on YouTube that said:

“I think it’s safe to say that no one has suffered more in the last hundred years than the Palestinian people.”

Read that again.

“I think it’s safe to say that no one has suffered more in the last hundred years than the Palestinian people.”

100 years ago was 1924. A whole lot of suffering has happened in the past hundred years and while of course Palestinians have suffered much since 1948 (which was 76 years ago) it is absolutely historically inaccurate to say that they have suffered the most.

For a brief recap, in the last 100 years (including ongoing events)…

WW2, (~60+ million civilian deaths) specifically the Holocaust (~12 million deaths) as well as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (~200,000+ deaths total)

The Korean War (2.5 million deaths total)

The Vietnam War (1.3 million deaths total)

6-9 million people died due to Stalin's policies in the USSR

Yugoslav Wars (~150,000 deaths total)

Conflict in Sudan (2.5 million deaths total)

Russia's Invasion of Ukraine (~100,000 deaths in Ukraine)

Syrian Civil War (300,000+ civilian deaths)

Cambodian Genocide (~2 million deaths)

Conflict in DRC (~6 million deaths)

Rwandan Genocide (~800,000 deaths)

Iraq War (~150,000 deaths total)

Afghanistan War (~170,000+ deaths total)

To say that Palestinians have not suffered would be wrong. To say that Palestinians have suffered immensely this year would be correct. But your activism for Palestinians should not ignore history or erase the sufferings of many others that have occurred in the past 100 years.

If anyone would like the sources for any of these numbers I'm happy to provide, or if anyone would like to point out an event I missed.

note below the cut

*note - civilian refers to death counts that are only civilians, ~ refers to death counts that are in-exact, deaths total refers to death counts that include combatants

[catgirl-kaiju]

something worth pointing out in the case of Tumblr CEO @photomatt 's statement regarding predstrogen is the very clear side stepping of the conversation being had. the ask he chose to respond to as part of his statement was asking about tumblr's transmisogyny problem, and what he is commenting on is tumblr's transphobia problem.

transmisogyny is certainly related to transphobia, but the two are not the same. i've seen plenty of trans folks who are guilty of transmisogyny and have even been harassed by such individuals on this very website. he repeatedly refers to transphobia and accusations of tumblr staff being transphobes throughout the statement, but never once brings up transmisogyny. perhaps he is unfamiliar with the term, but he could look it up and read up on it before responding to a question directly asking about it. he is very clearly not doing his due diligence in addressing these concerns.

he mentions tumblr having "LGBT+ including trans people on staff," but this is not especially helpful in assessing tumblr's transmisogyny problem. based on this we don't know how many trans people, whether or not there any transfem or TMA folks (who might understand the nature of transmisogyny better than TME people) on staff, what positions these queer people hold in the company, or whether or not any of tumblr's queer employees are on the moderation team. and it's understandable why some of these specifics are left out; you don't want to put any staff members in danger of being doxxed or harassed, especially if they're vulnerable marginalized people. however, it seems to me a gross oversight to not mention if there are any trans folks working on the moderation team.

i think it's also a huge misstep to focus on predstrogen so singularly when the conversation about her account being nuked is part of a larger conversation about transmisogyny. what this reveals, too, is transmisogyny playing an active role in the decision to ban her for life. one of the aspects of transmisogyny is viewing transfem folks as especially and uniquely dangerous. i'd like @photomatt to ask himself if he would have taken "threats" like the one cited as seriously if they came from a cis person or a TME trans person. really reflect on that, Matt. i also put "threat" in scare quotes here because, frankly, it's pretty clear that said comment is a cartoonish and outlandish example of violence used to demonstrate that the intent to harm is not literal. i do this all the time both on here and in real life. telling a friend i'm going to "maul them to death" over a minor annoyance is a comedic way of expressing frustration in a way that communicates it's not actually a big deal. saying something like "i want them to explode after falling down the stairs when trying to evade a falling piano full of knives" about a public figure or someone who is negatively affecting your life works as a way of demonstrating the intensity of your feelings while not veering into territory where it sounds like you're literally planning an assassination attempt. if you're reading this, Matt, i hope you can begin to understand the difference between something like:

and a real actual harassment, like:

y'know, all actual comments and posts i've received on this website, and reported with detailed explanations for why i'm reporting them but never heard back from the moderation team about the situation. i have no idea if anything was ever done about any of these people sending me bigoted violent messages because no one ever does follow-up. the only time i've ever received follow-up on a report was when i reported an account for promoting self-harm in the form of anorexia. that's it. one time in the over a decade i've been on this website.

how does all of this sit with you, Matt?

[nyancrimew]

ace aro people stop derailing and being annoying challenge. we should bring aphobia back

man shut the fuck up ur lame as hell