#turns out the critic group supports trolls

[kagenoneko]

Some Observations

After calling out the troll in the Ace Attorney section on fanfiction.net, I have experienced a deluged of spam reviews on my fics. One of those reviews happened to be from a member of Critics United.

The Critics United reviewer happened to have only one favorite story. That story is a word for word copy of Mein Kampf by Adolf Hilter. Doesn't seem like a story that someone from Critics United would support, especially since it is a rule violating story.

Then I decided to do a search based on some words from the review and added site: fanfiction.net to the end of the search query. I found that using DuckDuckGo resulted in me find a bunch of other reviews that use that exact same phrasing. Using google resulted in me find this blog post on on flames.

As for the other reviews that I found, some are associated with a different user. Here is an image of one of the reviews:

And here is another example:

And I have also found a similar review that was from a guest and then there was a story that I found that had a ton of guest reviews that had this similar kind of language. The guest reviews are under different names most of the time.

So I decided to search the user who had left the review on my fic.

That search resulted in me finding some of their comments on a forum that was not associated with Critics United. Their comment was pro-Donald Trump and implies all members of Critics United are also fans of Donald Trump.

It also seems like a Critics United member might be supportive of John Phoenix spam fest going on the Ace Attorney section.

To pull all what I found together as a TL;DR:

-Critics United members post unoriginal flame reviews

-Their members are pro-Trump and some like a story that is a copy of My Struggle by Adolf Hilter.

-Support the people who post troll content on ff.net.

So yeah, these people are horrible.

[gentlebeardsbarngrill]

02/10/2024 Daily OFMD Recap

TLDR; Long Post is Long. Cast & Crew Sightings; David Jenkins; Matt Maher; Clowning; Rhys Darby; Rosie; Samba; Max Trolling Reminder; Coyote Vs Acme Cont'd / Articles; Watch Party Reminders for Feb 11; SafeSpaceShip; Art Director's Guild Nominee; We Need to Be a Lighthouse! Game; AdoptOurCrew Choose Your Own Adventure; Love Notes; Daily Darby / Today's Taika;

= Cast & Crew Sightings =

Well as you can imagine, the David Jenkins IG is the big news of today. The clowning forecast has gone up significantly. Dad posted one of the late-blooming SaveOFMD banners in NY and attached Elton John - Candle In The Wind to the post. This song has some very specific significance to our fandom.

Apparently back when we lost Lucius in Season 1, Chaos Dad posted this song to Nathan Foad. Src @cptn_brightsky's Twitter Post

Now ADD to that... David Jenkins ALSO added this picture of Matthew Maher standing in front of a saveOFMD flyer found out on the street.

NOW OF COURSE, we are all clowning, but I think as usual Chaos Dad is trying to give us info without giving us info since the fandom pays so much attention to every little detail.

@saltpepperbeard has a theory that I'm down to clown with until I turn blue in the face. Src.

So yeah, as always take the clowning how you will, but I'll be honest, this looks like great news to me. It really does. CLOWN ON MY FRIENDS.

= Other Cast & Crew Sightings =

Rhys Darby's going to be at The Bourbon Room Hollywood next Friday, 2/16 at 8 PM PT.

== Rosie ==

Since doing cute stuff just doesn't stop in the Darby houshold, tonight I wanted to make a special shout out to Rosie Carnahan Darby, Rhys' Wife who has been active the last couple days. First and foremost, she knit a little blanket and hat for Samba's baby!

Second apparently she's restocked the Awesomeness Comedy website with more Buttons McGinty books and Comedy Special DVD's in case you're interested.

Oh and by the way, Samba loves the blanket:

= Vico Ortiz =

Tonight Vico was out performing with Them Fatale Drag Kings at their last night at their home bar Redline! Just some shots from their IG stories, feel free to check out more.

== Max Trolling ==

Gentle reminder luvs, if you're going to IG, or Twitter to troll Max posts, let's try to remember not to post OFMD/Negative comments on any posts that are celebrating underrepresented groups. We want to support those groups. Please note however, if you'd done it previously and didn't know, don't beat yourself up! We all make mistakes, just please try to keep it in mind going forward! (If you can delete your previous posts, great, if not, again not the end of the world).

== Coyote Vs Acme Cont'd / Articles ==

Why Deleting and Destroying Finished Movies Like Coyote vs Acme Should Be a Crime

This article is from yesterday but this blurb was pretty damn specific so I wanted to make sure if you missed it you got to see some of the reasons why Max did cancel OFMD.

"Some of the company’s tactics post-merger were garden-variety ruthless, like eliminating 87 series from its streaming platform Max, so that they won’t have to pay union-mandated residuals to the talent that created already-existing programs or pony up funds to produce more seasons of existing ones (such as “Our Flag Means Death,” one of the company’s most popular and critically acclaimed comedies—canceled after just two seasons)."

= Watch Party / Event Reminders =

Feb 11: Q+ and AdoptOurCrew Season 2 Live-Rewatch Party

Times: 2PM GMT, 9 AM EST, 6 AM PST

Watch Party Hashtags:

#OurFlagMeansBBC 

#OurFlagMeansRewatch

#SaveOFMD 

#AdoptOurCrew

= Feb 11: Relax I'm From the Future Watch Party! =

Sunday February 11th, 1 PM PT. 4 PM ET, 9PM GMT

Watch Party Hashtags:

#PiratesFromTheFuture

#SaveOFMD

#AdoptOurCrew

== In Person Events: San Diego CA ==

February 11, 2024 at 4 PM at Maritime Museum of San Diego

Costumes & Cosplay Encouraged! Location: Maritime Museum of San Diego 1492 North Harbor Drive San Diego, CA 92101

Hashtags:

#SafeSpaceShip

#SaveOFMD

#AdoptOurCrew

= Art Director's Guild Award Nominee! =

Sorry, I forgot to add this one yesterday!

Ra Vincent - Nominee for Half-Hour Single - Camera Series. Src: @AdoptOurCrew and ADG

Check out the Design Presentation: OFMD_s2_art.pdf

== We Need To Be A LightHouse! ==

Have YOU heard of this awesome new Monkey Island Inspired Point and Click Adventure Game by @blueberreads and @eldawee? They've been working on it for months and it's FINALLLLLLLY HEEEERE!

These folks are so incredibly talented! Please go check it out here! https://dawee.itch.io/lighthouse If you're using a MAC OS you'll most likely need to download an executable at the bottom of the main page. Just FYI! If it prompts you with the "you downloaded this from the internet" error just click OK. I already started playing with it and I'm in love.

I pushed Ed and he asked if I wanna do something weird xD Okay no more spoilers, GO CHECK IT OUT!

== AdoptOurCrew Choose Your Own Adventure Game!==

In honor of the s2 watch party with Q! tomorrow, @adoptourcrew did a really adorable choose your own adventure game on twitter today! They did polls and let the majority pick which direction they wanted the story to go!

Since it was a lot of pictures I made a separate post so you can see the whole story: @adoptourcrew Choose Your Own Adventure here on tumblr. Please check it out!

== Love Notes ==

Alrighty lovelies. It's been another busy day. Lots of clowning, lots of hope, lots of emotional roller coasters. I hope you had a good time and generally it was more positive than negative. I have a lot I want to say, but my brain is still pretty foggy. So I'll make this short.

Sometimes when things go well, our brain gets excited and then they overcompensate when we calm down. It starts to think a lot more negatively because it had so much extra dopamine for a time. When that happens, little things can be really devastating. I just want you to remember that we all make mistakes and YOU, you beautiful imperfect being are not your mistakes. They hurt, and we learn from them, but they don't define us. Try not to listen to your brain if it's telling you otherwise. You are so very wonderful.

Anyway, I hope that makes sense.

Here's a picture I found today I thought really applied to all you wonderful people. Thank you to all the folks who reached out to me and checked in and sent me love when you knew I was struggling (there are too many to list and I don't know if you want to be tagged so please just know how much I appreciate you). I love you all so much, and I'm so lucky to how found people who make me feel like it's ok to be me.

== Daily Darby / Today's Taika ==

Tonight is once again animal themed. I wish I'd made that Taika gif last night for the lovebirds theme, but here we are.

[mariacallous]

Ahead of the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, a liberal Gen-Z-led group has purchased a handful of domain names related to the top Republican primary candidates in an effort to extinguish support from young voters.

“Republicans are not investing in outreach to young people, and we know why,” Jessica Siles, deputy press secretary for Voters of Tomorrow, said in a statement to WIRED on Friday. “Their regressive, radical stances on abortion rights, guns, climate change, and other top issues are overwhelmingly unpopular with Gen Z. Since Trump and Haley won’t accurately inform young people of their views, we will.”

Voters for Tomorrow has bought up new domain names—GenZforTrump.org and GenZforHaley.org—in an effort to sway young voters in battleground states from backing Republicans in the 2024 election. The websites will redirect to another site, GenZvsFarRight.org, which the group says will outline how “out-of-touch” the GOP’s platform is with the needs of young voters. On the redirected site, the group outlines Trump and Haley’s records on the environment, LGBTQ+ rights, and gun safety, among other issues, without explicitly encouraging people to vote for Biden.

To reach them, the group is launching a digital ad campaign across Instagram and Snapchat, hoping to reach at least half a million users in battleground states where they say the youth vote could make a difference for Democrats. “Gen Z will determine our next president,” the ads say, as they ask users to visit the websites for more information on Trump and Haley. Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Arizona, and Florida are some of the states where these ads will run, and the group plans to spend as much as it takes to reach at least half a million voters, Jack Lobel, Voters of Tomorrow's 19-year-old national press secretary, told WIRED on Friday.

For nearly a decade, domain trolling, or the act of buying up URLs related to an opposing candidate and redirecting them to unfavorable information, has become a popular digital media tactic for campaigns. In 2015, Senator Ted Cruz and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina had domains related to their GOP presidential campaigns swiped up by trolls before they were able to grab them. CarlyFiorina.org, at one point, displayed 30,000 sad-faced emojis to represent the workers she laid off at HP. In 2020, the Biden campaign bought KeepAmericaGreat.com, the Trump campaign’s reelection slogan, attacking Trump’s handling of the pandemic.

“P.S., If the GOP candidates had invested in young voter outreach efforts like we are, maybe we wouldn’t have acquired these website domains in the first place,” stated Voters of Tomorrow’s press release.

It’s impossible to know whether these domain trolls have the power to sway voter sentiment. But Voters of Tomorrow thinks they do. “Trump is the greatest threat to our generation, and we’re going to continue to expand that belief in our generation throughout this project because the stakes of the 2024 election are unprecedented,” Lobel said.

In 2020, young people came out to vote in record numbers and arguably helped turn the election in Biden’s favor. But a recent poll from the Harvard Kennedy School has shown that the same demographic appears less likely to vote in 2024 than in the prior presidential election, declining from 57 percent to 49 percent. The poll reported that a plurality of these voters distrust Biden and Trump to act on critical issues like climate change, gun violence, and health care, which could dampen their desire to vote in this year’s election. Those same voters said Trump was the better choice to address the current crisis in Gaza over Biden by 5 percentage points.

These numbers could spell trouble for Biden and the Democrats come November. Around 41 million Gen-Z voters will be eligible to vote for the first time in 2024, according to Tufts University. Of those voters, more than 8 million of them will be first-time voters, and could play an outsize role in electing the next president.

“Young voters have historically been left out of the political process, and that changed with the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Young voters realized their power. And since then, we’ve been showing up in droves to shape elections,” Lobel told WIRED. “Going into 2024, we have to build on that power.”

[omar-writes-stuff]

Good morning 🌿

Unlimited has recently blocked me out of fear of being discovered and sent all their followers to do the same for fear that they’d actually use their brain and critical thinking skills and realize for themselves that they’re lying to all of us, but I’ll keep going nonetheless and break it all down 🌿

“Incorrect Kaeloo quotes” is also a fake account run by Unlimited, who strangely only ever says everything they want them to say to support them even tho they’ve never been in stm or never interacted with other server members apparently (just like raspberry used to do lol)

I’m not a troll and I’m not harassing anyone, the fact that I’m simply asking for proof and explanation goes to show you feel “threatened” by my harmless curiosity and autistic interest

I’m not tracking down a child because there is NO child, I’m trying to find their real identity and use logic to help everyone realize that the writer is actually Unlimited themselves (nobody has sent me proof of messages yet so my suspicions are only growing bigger)

I’m sorry but I have no idea who the people that made the doc are, my friends are from Twitter and they shared the document with me there but that’s about it :)

Never sent a single rude ask in my whole life, again, I’ve ONLY asked simple questions. If Unlimited is innocent then why are they so scared by my questions?

You turned off your ask box after sending yourself a billion insults and slurs and death threats in the hopes of framing others for it and painting yourself as a victim (again, it’s not working I’m afraid. Maybe 2 people from your group were dumb or naive enough to be able to fall for it when you made them believe it was “Jay from the doc”, but this trick is also poorly structured and bound to fall).

“Sharing a porn fic in the Kaeloo tag”? Weird Unlimited…is this you with all your underage followers?

Listen good Unlimited: You can try to lie and manipulate naive children by pretending to be a child yourself behind a fake account (groomer behavior btw), you can try to shame others for writing nsfw even tho there’s nothing wrong with it and you enjoy it and write it as much as everyone else (which is your fair right as an adult), you can try to insult yourself and try to blame it on someone else in the hopes that people will feel pity towards you (really Unlimited? “Acoustic? Cowardly bitch?” Learn better insults), but one thing will always, and I mean ALWAYS, stay true…

The truth ALWAYS comes out eventually.

Hope you all have fun and have a good day everyone, I’ll be spending a lovely day outside enjoying my life because, unlike Unlimited, I have absolutely nothing to hide. Mashallah, goodbye 🌿💗

[unpopularfanopinion]

if your defense of ao3 ignores the racism and zionism displayed by both users and staff then you are in no position to call people white supremacists. protecting bigotry under the guise of "free speech" while belittling and shouting down opposition is exactly what conservatives do. don't act like the people who disagree with you are republican adjacent when you've used their ideals to make your point as well.

i hope you snap your neck falling off that high horse lmao.

I am going to try to say this as simply, bluntly, and kindly as possible. I have not compared anyone demanding additional content moderation than the current legal stand they use to being white supremacists. I have compared them to conservative authoritarians. If you think being a white supremacists, or supporting white supremacy is inherently or intrinsically tied to conservative authoritarianism you are sadly mistaken.

A Frank Wilhoit gave one of the best description of conservatives and conservatism ever

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect

There is no marginalized group that is so inherently good and pure that they will not have members who desiring, power and control over others will try to place themselves as the protected in-group and others into the subjugated outgroup. (and oddly enough you're complaining about one such example of an oppressed marginalize group that successfully turn itself in a group of conservative, authoritarian oppressors. If you can't tell yes I am talking about the Zionists. While tight media control and propaganda helped them get away with it for so long, part if was also "Oh they were so harassed and oppressed in so many places and for so long. They has a people understand the pain of oppression. They wouldn't go harm another people.)

As I have mentioned in the past being conservative is more about a way of thinking and HOW you come to your positions rather than about the positions themselves. Studies have demonstrated that conservatives have a much stronger disgust reaction than liberals. So when an idea or concept triggers a feeling of disgust they immediately assume that thing to be evil, immoral etc. . . without truly taking the time consider if it’s actually harmful(or even disgusting sometimes it’s just different) This winds up making them fearful of change and non-conforming behavior.

This feeling of disgust also makes them feel justified in certain forms of bigotry making up all manner of excuses to call whatever disgusts them immoral. Such as supposedly leftist progressives being ablelist and claiming that any disabled person is basically a child and therefore featuring disabled people having sex(fictional or live action)is no different than CSEM.

Conservatism is more often less about the specific position a person claims to hold and more about how they got to those positions, and how they intend to fix the issues and problems that they find.

Conservatives hide behind claims of free speech when they wants to spam, harass, and troll people(and often using other people's equipment such as servers to do so) And I have noticed that when people like you actually seem to care about free speech on Ao3, when you want to spam comments, troll people, and harass people using Ao3's comment features either on news posts or on people's stories.

There is a lot to criticize about Ao3's response to reports of racist harassment, and how they resolve interpersonal disputes between volunteers, however none of that can or would be resolved by them even trying to make additional content rules or attempt to ban "bad fic" Because despite what you think someone writing a bad fic, or using certain tropes(tropes are tools, tropes are not bad) is not in and of itself harassment.

And also no, Ao3 staff telling one volunteer not to harass, and abuse another and reminding them of the professional code of conduct they expect from ALL volunteers is not proof of Zionism among Ao3's staff. Pretty much everyone involved in that fight on Slack on reprimanded for it but only one went crying to the internet about it. If that had happened between a Ukrainian volunteer and Russian volunteer and the Ukrainian volunteer quit would you be accusing Ao3 of being pro-Russia?

[sailorsharky]

On Hogwarts Legacy and allyship.

TW/CW: J.K Rowling, Hogwarts Legacy, Transphobia, Antisemitism mentioned. Right. CW out of the way, let me preface this by saying that this may turn out to be a long ramble, but I feel the need to voice my grievances in some way as a non-binary person. First of all, let's set some boundaries. Arguments in bad faith and trolling shall be ignored and/or reported/blocked. Lately, with all this hassle going on about Hogwarts Legacy, I felt the need to air my frustrations. We have all seen many different arguments from across both sides, but I will try to keep this as short as I can.

This game has been talked about well before launch, and many trans and enby folks, as well as Jewish people have asked for people to show solidarity by not buying the game. As an ally, it's important to note that it's not a lifetime pass. Many think that being an ally just means saying you support something or be generally neutral and not saying slurs. That is not the case. To be an ally you have to listen to what marginalized groups are saying. The release of this game and the widescale purchase of it by people only talking the talk and not walking the walk has shown many of us under the Trans umbrella (as well as our Jewish comrades) that we cannot trust those we called allies.

I am not saying that playing this game automatically makes you a bigoted person. Some folks I know got it and one admitted that the last JKR controversy he recalled was the whole "Dumbledore is now gay" debacle. (Pretty solid rock you've been under. Room for one more? /j) My ire is not pointed towards people that were genuinely ignorant of the situation, though my disappointment still stands and my trust in them as allies is gone. What mostly draws my ire is the knee-jerk reaction of supposed "allies" when pointing out that they have crossed the picket line and attempt to rationalize their purchase with arguments such as "I'm only supporting the devs", "I'm seperating the art from the artist", "What will 60-70 bucks change?" and "It's okay though because I donated as much/more to a Trans charity!" and so on. Let's go through them one by one. I'd like to keep this as short as possible however as many others have pointed out why these fall flat. 1. "I'm only supporting the devs". If you ONLY support the devs (of which the lead dev and a voice actor share JKR's horrific viewpoints), why aren't you buying EVERY single game on every storefront you make use of? This is a non-argument. If you buy games ONLY to support the devs, then by all means, bankrupt yourself to do just that. But you don't. You wanted to buy this game for nostalgia's sake. 2. "I'm separating the art from the artist" As a fan of HP Lovecraft's work, I understand the want to separate the art from the artist. But 1) Lovecraft is rotting in the ground as we speak. JKR is very much alive. 2) It's hard to seperate the art from the artist when said art is used as a cudgel to infringe upon human rights and dignity. Every act of consumption of her IP she sees as a vote of confidence in her brand of hatred. You may not personally see it that way, but she does, and she relishes in it. "But you just said you like Lovecraft's work! He was VERY racist and xenophobic!" Yes, absolutely! Let's HAVE that conversation, but not on this post. I agree that Lovecraft's art needs to be talked about in a critical light and the setting needs to be reclaimed and distanced from his fear and hatred of all things Not-From-New-England.

For now, moving on to... 3. "What will 60-70 bucks change?" In the grand scheme of things? Nothing. But this was never about trying to ruin JKR's pocket book. This was a litmus test for allies. Stand side by side or cross the picket line and play a mid-tier magic game filled with propaganda and caricatures of Jewish people (among other things). No, I will not entertain statements such as "But I don't see that! If anything, you seeing Jewish caricatures means you are the antisemite!" No buddy, no no no, that's not how propaganda works. There are other posts that delve into this. But in short; recognizing when something is a racist caricature does not make you a racist. Nor does not recognizing it immediately make you a racist, it simply means that you do not recognize propagandic imagery and it's important to listen to people who do know about it, specifically people that have been so unfavourably depicted in the past and present. Moving on. 4. "It's okay though because I donated as much/more to a Trans charity!" Martin Luther would like to have a strong conversation with you. Specifically 95 Theses long. Karma is not a linear scale. Buying something that ends up directly harming people and then turning around to pledge the same amount of money (or more) to a charity is not going to fix the broken trust, nor will it actually help at that point. What might help mend the fence is recognizing what the issue is and listening to the voices of those affected. Granted, many of us feel that they can no longer trust former allies because of this. Once broken, trust is hard to repair. It's important to keep that in mind and not get upset when we point it out. Personally, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but with that said, I won't be so trusting of people calling themselves allies when they choose to spend 60-70 bucks on a game that directly benefits Queen TERF (Royalty cheques are a thing, remember? You ARE directly financing her hate) rather than saving the money or putting it to a different game or charity. In short, my advice for folks that call themselves allies is this; If you want to call yourself an ally, actually listen to what is being said and learn from it. We all make mistakes, but launching into a kneejerk reaction is simply degrading what little trust remained. Don't just virtue signal, but stand beside the voices of the marginalized in solidarity.

That is all I can spare at the moment. Please keep the responses civil among one another. Asking for clarification is a-okay. Repeating above mentioned "arguments" and more like them is not. P.S: Do forgive me if I forgot some key points, I've been running on very little sleep at the moment and I needed to air my frustrations in a constructive way.

[redwineconversation]

in re harsh truths

I don't like getting involved in this sort of stuff but this is also really getting on my last nerves.

There is only one group of supporters who have a documented history of:

impersonating individuals, whether it be on a social media platform, on the hellsite known as the L-Chat, or just outright catfishing (???)

harassing players who leave the club

stalking players on social media

stalking and harassing the family members of a player, to the point of actually traveling to another country to do so

violating basic boundaries

inability to grasp human decency.

And I think we all know which group of supporters it is, and it's not Lyon.

Now I get it, Arsenal fans have never grasped the concept of critical thinking before, so really to expect them to display any of it now is on me. I should have known better than for them to even suspect that just because invasive behavior is the norm for them, it might not be for supporters of other clubs.

I don't know why that Dutch troll whose name is (_____) and who works (__ _ __________) has a complete and utter meltdown every time Ellie Carpenter commits the crime of humanity that is breathing. I don't know she continuously promotes the narrative that Danielle van de Donk must have cheated, despite written evidence by their darling Beth Mead stating otherwise.

I also, for the life of me, do not understand why (_____) cares so much about players she so openly dislikes. It requires time and effort that could so easily be spent elsewhere. It's not that hard.

It's genuinely infuriating to me that Arsenal fans seem to think that because they exhibit so much invasive behavior it is seen as the norm amongst them, that they seem to think other supporters act the same way. When called out on it, there's immediate defensive behavior, and it turns into a "well, you have no fans!" competition of handbag throwing.

Like Jesus Christ guys. Look at some of the shit you Arsenal fans deem acceptable behavior. Ask yourselves why you seem to think impersonating people is something that should be given a pass. The truth is, you know what you're doing is wrong. But you don't want to pretend that you are alone in displaying this gross behavior and so you pretend to be other fans doing the same just to manipulate the reality that, well, people see Arsenal fans exactly for what they are.

Arsenal fans have the reputation they do for a reason. Maybe they can focus on trying to change that rather than harassing my club's players or impersonating people on social media platforms.

[ms-revived-frogs]

Open letter to all terfs:

You��re revolting. You look at a group of people trying their best to survive, to break an oppressive view of the world, and you try your best to ruin them. Need I explain why painting a group of people as monsters, why encouraging others to oppress a minority, why raping (and yes, trans people have been and are raped by terfs) and killing a group of people is wrong?

You claim to be for Justice, yet at every turn you side with fascists who impose the very rules you claim to want to break! Hell, you enforce those rules yourselves, claiming that they’re entrenched in sex! You claim that women are inherently weaker, gentler! That no woman has broad shoulders or facial hair, that no woman has excess testosterone, that no woman looks like a man!

Don’t you see how repulsive you are to people not embroiled in hate? Don’t you want to do something to make the world better, not worse? Use your passion for good! If you can’t understand trans people, if you don’t care too, fine! Focus your passion towards something else, but don’t focus it on a small population of people who just want to live happily in their own skin.

Prove to me you’re not just bigots. Prove me wrong, and put away your hate. Prove me wrong, and improve yourselves. Or, don’t. And let your hate consume you. But just understand, trans people are never going away. You can’t stop them from existing. But you can make your existence better.

I feel like this is a troll just in part of how misinformed it is. But some things I would like to clear up outside of just pure insults are...

1) Radical feminists are not out there raping and killing trans people. I tried searching up for examples and found no such cases. Please feel free to send me any such proof and I will gladly avoid and cease support for anyone who does that to another person, trans or not.

2) Radical feminists do not say that women are weaker or gentler. Radical feminists acknowledge the reality that female bodies store more fat and less muscle. This is a biological fact. This doesn't mean women are weak, we have our own unique strengths as well. Just in terms of physical strength, specifically upper body strength, men tend to perform better.

3) Radical feminists do not say that women don't have broad shoulders or facial hair or higher levels of testosterone. I am a woman with broad shoulders and thicker than average peach fuzz (brown genes coming through!), and yet all the radical feminists I've met in here would still consider me 100% female. Because I am. And yes there are women with elevated testosterone levels, we see this often in women with various hormonal conditions or DSDs, and yet still, these types of conditions / disorders are often female-exclusive (ex. Intersex Turner Syndrome only occurs in biological females). Meaning that they don't disprove the sex binary and female as a distinct category, but reinforce it.

4) I and other gender critical / radical feminists have not always been this opinionated. I once identified as trans myself (I first thought I was "genderfluid", then FtM briefly). Even after that, I still remained "anti terf". It was upon watching this marginalised group grow a more toxic and toxic activist movement that made me reevaluate my opinions. Watching as lesbians and gay men were called bigoted for their "genital preferences"; watching famous feminists like Chimamanda Adichie be called transphobic for recognising woman as a sex class; watching women in general get called transphobic (and other names like "terf", "bitch", "cunt", etc) just for recognising their biological reality. It became apparent that the matter of trans activism was no longer concerned with genuinely supporting trans people - which I still do - but with exerting dominance over women and gay people. I still recognise and support trans people's rights to safety from discrimination, proper housing, the right to their own spaces, etc. These are all things that trans people are entitled to, and deserve, as a marginalised group. They are not, however, entitled to dominate over women legally or socially by erasing the status of woman as a female person - which has been recognised since the dawn of time.

5) I do not want trans people to stop existing, I actually want for them to get better care concerning their dysphoria and for them to receive better treatment in general. I will happily support their rights to things that really matter (like I said earlier, protection from discrimination, proper housing, etc). I just cannot deny my own status as a female person and that being what makes me a woman. Trans activism must be compatible with basic reality, or it will never be taken seriously as a movement for people's rights; you must understand that when your movement pushes against the reality of biology, people will rightfully misinterpret it. There is a way that trans activism and feminism can be compatible, but they will not be if trans activists keep erasing women and gay people, eradicating our sex-based spaces (see: Vancouver Rape Relief vandalism), and harassing feminists.

[kenzotheweebmaster]

Do toxic fans in some online spaces make it difficult to become or identify as a fan?

In the present world, social media holds an incredible power which can affect or influence an individual’s social life which either can be in positive way or negative way. Among in this present generation, people constantly feeling pressured especially among the youngsters to keep up with what is popular and trying to seek approvals from their peers. In this case, fandom community are often facing this situation every day. While social media can be used by people who are a fan of a particular something which either can be a fan of movies, anime, favorite celebrities, and so forth, utilizing it to express their thoughts, or opinions on the platform, as well as maintaining connections can contribute to a positive atmosphere. However, what will happen when social media cease to contribute to an individuals’ happiness, sense of belonging, support and empowerment, fulfillment and enjoyment, and stress relief, turned into a source of toxicity in the fandom community? According to Taylor (2023), the term “toxic fandom” is used to describe admirers of popular culture who engage in behaviors that are seen as inappropriate and unpleasant.  Especially on social media, toxic fans that bring their negative behaviors can lead to a serious issue among the other fans within the fandom community as well as people’s perspective from the outside to have different views on the community in general. Which brings us to this question arises; Do toxic fans in some online spaces make it difficult to become or identify as a fan?

Let’s look at K-pop fandom as an example here. When an individual is discussing a K-pop group on social media platforms, disagreement from other fans can happen. But disagreement from a certain fans, the individual may expose themselves to cyberbullying. Online discussions about K-pop group very often it can lead to intimidation, racial slurs, misogynistic remarks, and even explicit death threats if the discussion using a single term that goes against the broader K-pop community. It could be criticizing K-pop groups or labels, making statements that don’t portray the group in the best light, even expressing support for different K-pop acts. In addition to that, even discussing K-pop cyberbullying can lead to backlash and be blamed for pointing out the evident issue by bullies who can’t accept valid criticism. Not to mention, engaging with trolls is also pointless as they might label the individual who speaks out as an  ‘ anti ’ and using whataboutism to justify their actions. Even for a journalist, who are also a passionate fans, may downplay the problem ,saying its minimal and limited to a small group. (Raphael Rashid, 2022)

As a fan of anime, myself, sometimes I like to discuss it with other people on social media even with the people who just started to get into anime. From my perspective it is a wonderful sight and interaction because I met other people who have the same interest as mine and consider them as fellow allies. However, there are some fans who gatekeeping other fans from taking part in activities, for example discussing anime shows. According to Urban Dictionary, the term Gatekeeping is someone who takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity. In fandom context, it is someone who acts of setting up barriers, criteria, or requirements to determine who is considered as a “ true ” fan and who is not. Often these gatekeepers use the phrase “ you’re not a true fan “ as a weapon that they throw around and uses those weak justifications and labeling others encourage new fans to keep their developing interests hidden until they feel experienced enough to proudly share them. For example, when Megan Thee Stallion displayed and expressed her love for anime on social media, many gatekeepers expressed their hatred because the character she cosplayed doesn’t match her skin color and isn’t worthy of being identifies as a true anime fan. (Nicole Trinidad, 2021).

In conclusion, every fandom has its fair share of troublesome fans. Though it is fun and enjoyable to engage and interact with other people who has mutual interest in particular fandom, these toxic fans that belongs in the fandom community that has been mentioned above, does make it very challenging for other fans to discuss, and express their thoughts on social media without ever have to feel of being judged by those “ so-called fans” just because they view it as a fact, and think it in a very close minded. Nevertheless, there are also numerous respectful fans combating the negativity of the fandom, trying to make social media a good platform to have fun with others that have real passion, mutual, and love for something that they like.

List of References

Rashid, R 2022, Cyberbullying by K-pop Fans Must Stop, Medium, 18 Jun, viewed on 23 November 2023, https://medium.com/@koryodynasty/cyberbullying-by-k-pop-fans-must-stop-c7e1f978fa57.

Taylor, V 2023, Toxic Fandom: What Is It?, Medium, 31 January, viewed on 23 November 2023, https://medium.com/change-becomes-you/toxic-fandom-what-is-it-c8c1520beb06.

Trinidad, N 2021, Exclusivity within fandoms creates toxic environment, Daily Titan, 2 April, viewed on 26 November 2023, https://dailytitan.com/opinion/exclusivity-within-fandoms-creates-a-toxic-environment/article_f6a7c2d4-8d09-11eb-918c-9331db53d0ff.html.

[gothhabiba]

Much of the time [...] the new reaction against the politics of recognition is also framed in terms of recognition: ‘identity politics’ is denounced for depriving white men, the working class or the nation-state of the recognition that is rightly theirs. The struggle for recognition has turned into an arms race, in which majority cultural identities deploy the language of minority rights in their defence. [...] [Nancy] Fraser’s warning that, in the absence of any counter-balancing theory of economics, recognition politics could lapse into vulgar culturalism, has been borne out across the ideological spectrum. The politics of recognition has acquired more momentum than anyone could have foreseen in the 1990s. In particular, the digital public sphere is seething with allegations of misrecognition, not all of them made in good faith, and some deliberately used as a tool of confusion.

Two immediate responses present themselves. The first is to remain loyal to subjective experiences of injustice and their modes of articulation, even at the price of escalating the culture war. This retains the advantage of allowing groups to articulate injuries and injustices in their own terms; but that process is now being used by the right as a way of satirizing and sabotaging all discourses of social justice, turning the politics of recognition into a trap for the left. A second response would be to write off the politics of recognition altogether, in favour of a wholly externalist mode of critique that brackets the discourse and demands of injured parties. This provides a welcome exit from cultural politics, but ducks the democratic questions of how to give voice to suffering and agency to the marginalized. Fraser anticipated these difficulties with remarkable acuity, noting that the inflation of recognition as a political category risked the displacement of material injustices, and the reification of simplistic identities, which could become increasingly insular. Her answer proposed a two-dimensional theory of justice, in which equality of political participation is supported by recognition of status and material redistribution, both mutually interdependent. Recognition would not be an end in itself, but a necessary component of positive freedom.

My intention here is to come at the current explosion of recognition demands from a different perspective: to consider how transformations in the public sphere have led to a mutation in how recognition is demanded and supplied. The key condition for this is the digital platform, which has ushered in a new era of public participation in which recognition of status is never adequately achieved by anyone, so injustice feels ubiquitous. In the attention economy of social media, public actors may long for recognition, but have to settle instead for varying quantities of ‘reputation’, or simply the ‘reaction’ of immediate feedback. The task, I suggest, is to retain some loyalty to how everyday critiques and expressions of suffering articulate themselves, but also to arm ourselves with critical resources against the latest tricks pulled by what Jodi Dean terms ‘communicative capitalism’. The rise of platform capitalism has occasioned a new phase which needs to be understood, if critique is not to be ensnared by a platform logic of rating and trolling.

William Davies, "The Politics of Recognition in the Age of Social Media"

[noteverythingisgrooming]

Meta Post #2: Fantasy, Real Cruelty

There was once a time when cyber-bullying was novel. The early history of the Internet, which included sites like Cracked.com, Something Awful, and 4chan, was rife with shock content, but likewise the early 2000s featured shock comedy, radio shock jocks, and abrasive characters in television series. Offensiveness was a kind of aesthetic adopted by a wide range of parties to affect various poses of masculinity, patriotism, wit, and individualism. To be rude to someone online was more about affecting a pose than inciting terror. Thus, when the news of Phoebe Prince's suicide broke, it was a story that captured people's attention, especially the attention of parents. Bullying has existed for a very long time, but it usually involved some risk on the part of the bully -- having to engage in a physical altercation or the risk of being observed and intercepted by peers. Now there was a way to coordinate harassment with low stakes, and in such a way that the victim could not even escape with physical space.

Now online harassment is a normalized part of online culture. Taylor Swift fans doxxed a music critic for giving a lukewarm review. Star Wars fans send each other death threats based on which fictional characters they imagine having a romance. Twitter trolls create sock puppet accounts to stir up controversy and in-fighting. White supremacists call the employers of people who criticize them. Q-Anon supporters flooded Wayfair, a furniture company, with calls about a trafficking conspiracy, and harmed real children in the process.

In each of these examples, the coordinating group felt justified in their actions. Something that they have seen or heard online has been labeled toxic, dangerous, or offensive, and there is a wave of online action to stamp this behavior out. While each case could be analyzed on its own terms, I want to turn these examples to the focus of the blog: obsessive policing against art on the premise that it will 'encourage' or 'cause' abuse in some way.

In short, this is absurd. The truth is that even the possession of real child pornography does not predict contact (i.e. offline) offenses against children. If possessing evidence of a crime against a child and consuming that evidence does not correlate with a contact offense, then how can people assert that art might do so? This has to do with two broader misconceptions: the idea that art can influence one's morals, and the idea that pornography is linked with violence.

To address the second claim, no causal link between pornography and rape has ever been proved, though the theory has been touted for decades. Sexual violence has fallen by more than half since 1993. Between 1992 and 1998, cases of child sexual abuse fell by thirty-one percent. Multiple reports confirm these trends. Crime overall has significantly dropped. Yet online fervor would persuade one that abuse and crimes have increased. One could make a stronger argument for pornography decreasing sex crimes than for it increasing it.

To address the first claim, art is merely one factor in an individual's life, only one source of influence. Generally speaking one is exposed to culture, as opposed to repeated exposure to a singular piece of art, such that one could not point to any single piece of art whose exposure was so dominating as to be the point one could trace a belief to. As Maria Caruso argues, influence is much more complex than simply declaring a piece of art 'harmful' and assigning it responsibility for the morals and behaviors a viewer may adopt. However, as with the concept-child, people are eager to construct simple solutions for complicated problems.

To delve into the minds of people who harm children is uncomfortable and disturbing. It is easier -- and in fact, more fun -- to investigate what a person consumes, and then make large and simplified leaps to what this indicates about their psyche, and thus their future behavior. From there, the cruelty starts.

As evidence shows, this cruelty is not based in any evidence that altering someone's consumption patterns will change their behavior, because there is no evidence that someone's consumption patterns predict their behavior. Often, there is no evidence of any harmful behavior at all, and the consumption patterns are used to create rumors about potential (i.e. invented) behavior. Fantasy is a complicated realm where people indulge in thoughts and art that they would not humor or perform in their real lives. On the other hand, the cruelty that people inflict on one another over that art is very real.

What compels people to harm real others over fictional others? Once again, motivations may be broad, conscious and unconscious. Certainly in the case of Isabel Fall, there was professional jealousy. In fan spaces, there may be the desire to control a space so thoroughly that they are not exposed to anything they dislike. Others might have been conditioned into a kind of anxiety-paranoia disorder by exhortations to 'challenge' 'problematic content'. The overall result is that it takes very little to trigger real harassment campaigns and moral crusades whose goal is absurd and impossible on the outset.

Fiction is fiction, Vladimir Nabokov stated. Literature is invention. Art is an invention. Somehow this division has broken down, to the point people confuse consumption of fiction with behavior in life. But it is not so. Fantasy cannot be used to justify cruelty. Cruelty is never justified. We will not eliminate cruelty and abuse by exacting it upon those we disagree with or find disturbing. As always, the solution is much more complicated than that.

[northern-passage]

Do you have any advice for a new author or something that you wish someone had told you when you first started? I really want to share my work but it feels very daunting

i don't really think i'm the best person to ask for advice here but. sure

my best advice i guess would be that you need to make sure you are ready to receive criticism and also are actually open to criticism before posting anything online. if you're not ready for that then i would say don't force yourself to post anything until you are ready. also when it comes to criticism be receptive but don't let people be rude to you.

something else i've actually spoken with other authors about quite a bit that i've noticed recently is: focus on writing the game. this might sound a bit mean but i just mean in the most genuine sense, make sure you are actually writing your game. since i've been writing tnp the community has shifted in a way where it has become so focused on like... aesthetics and other frilly shit over the actual writing in games and i think people can really get caught up in making this really polished image while forgetting to actually write the game. aesthetics and themes can come later but you can't do anything if you don't even have a first draft. it doesn't have to be perfect, you just need to write it.

my second best piece of advice: you do NOT have to answer every ask you get. i know it can be very exciting as a new author getting asks and you want to answer them all but people send weird shit. sometimes it might be worth it to step back and really think if answering this weird ask about something that will never be relevant in game is actually worth it. with new authors, i see it all the time where they come into your inbox and try to see how far they can push you or how much they can get away with before you get mad or annoyed.

as for what i wish someone had told me...well. the IF community is not very good. particularly on tumblr it's very racist, it can be homophobic, and i’ve had transphobes in my inbox for over a year now (still mad about lea lol) i try my best to delete most troll/hate messages i get (see previous advice) but it can get exhausting. turning anon off will serve you best here. it sucks to have to say this but be ready to deal with these kinds of messages. literally no matter who you are or what your story is about, someone is going to send you some dumb, hateful shit, if nothing else but to get a reaction out of you.

you can join the interact-if author discord server to connect with other authors (i believe it's linked through their main discord server) other authors are going to be your biggest support especially on tumblr & it can make the whole process easier having a group of other authors to talk to. i have my own little space carved out here now where i hang with my friends and we all support each other and it makes it all a bit more tolerable.

tl;dr: be ready for and open to criticism, actually write your game, don't answer every ask you receive, and hope for the best but prepare for the worst 🥴

[queerfictionwriter]

On Fandom Policing: Part 1

This is gonna be an unpopular opinion, but I'm gonna come right out and say it: the "please examine your biases" argument in fandom is anti logic in concern-trolling drag. It is functionally meaningless, and has no actionable or observable objective within it aside from "don't write this thing I don't like".

Asking someone to examine their biases is not inherently a bad thing. It's something we should all do semi-regularly, like checkups or cancer screenings. But the problem with this argument in fandom is that you cannot know whether or not someone already has examined their biases, and chosen to create something you find personally objectionable or Problematic™ anyway. Arguing that people should do this in fandom creates the expectation that, if everyone were to examine their biases, the Thing—be it a trope, particular pairing, or popular trend—would simply cease to exist, because everyone would realize that it is Problematic; AKA, Wrong and Bad.

But Problematic™ fiction is not the problem these concern trolls want to make it out to be, because we live in an inherently flawed, problematic world, populated with inherently flawed, imperfect, messy beings. And that means that nothing is perfect or unproblematic, and the things that are, are probably incredibly unrealistic. They also risk being boring as hell. (1) 

It also means that "examine your biases" turns into a Trojan Horse of fandom bullying and groupthink, where you have to, somehow, "prove" to the concern trolls that you have examined your biases before you're allowed to create what you want, or before you're allowed to enjoy what others have created and shared for free without fear of concern trolling or dogpiling. But you will never be able to prove that you have, actually, done the deep internal work they're asking of you, because it's internal, and fandom is not an accurate reflection of who you are as an entire person. The only thing they will have to go on, and the only thing they will judge you by, is whether or not you have continued to write The Problematic Thing they don't like, regardless of your reasons for doing so. (2)

And, even if you do stop writing The Problematic Thing they don't like? Chances are, whatever else you've written will be "problematic" in some other way. And I need you to know that that is okay, because no one piece of media—mainstream, indie, or fandom-generated—can provide all representation to all people, no matter how good it is. The point of creating good representation is to make sure everyone can have stories that represent the various facets of their identities, to see characters like them across different genres and mediums, so they can feel seen and validated and reassured that the world knows they exist. And that is a massive job that no single piece of media or single person can accomplish alone.

That's why good representation is a team sport, and in the same way that sports teams have different members specializing in different roles, not everyone can write great representation for every group. And, to continue the metaphor, creating good representation requires practise and help. Criticizing people for doing badly only discourages them and makes them more likely to give up, not create better representation. It takes time to learn what good representation is, and how to create it, and—like any other skill—it is unfair to expect perfect execution 100% of the time. People need the time, space, and grace to fail and do badly before they are capable of doing well. Assigning ill intent to people in that phase is unfair, and you cannot know from the outside who is in that phase unless you have a close personal relationship with them. And, again, like a sports team: if you want the individual team members to do better, they need support and coaching from people they know and trust, not a mob of strangers screaming and hurling criticism from the stands. (3)

The argument around representing a Problematic thing being equated to supporting the Problematic thing in real life is a separate, also garbage, argument.

There are a wide variety of reasons for people to write Problematic™ things that are not “they are a horrible human being”, including, but not limited to: processing their own experiences; being new to writing, a particular fandom, or writing a particular minority group and making mistakes as they learn; and enjoyment of darkfic and the catharsis it provides. 

This entire argument presumes and addresses good faith attempts at representation. I am fully aware that there are, in fact, bad faith examples out there, and a lot of bad faith erasure, but that is not the topic of this particular essay.

Part 2

[softgrungeprophet]

the batman (and riddler) thoughts

most of my criticisms of the batman def come as criticisms of superhero and action media as a whole ie

evil mental illness, “not ALL cops are evil see?” etc. (tho ofc both of these are baked into batman as a property in a way that is probably actually the genesis of a lot of these tropes in superhero media as a whole, considering the longevity of the character)

but like okay

i found aspects of the riddler to be—to me—very obviously tied to like... american trends of mass violence as perpetrated by usually white dudes who feel wronged by the world and thus, shoot up a school or invade a building of people or whatever. i was thinking about the way he so clearly fit into that role for most of the movie and how obvious it felt to me the whole time i was in the theater. so like to ME personally the ending with the attempted massacre didn’t feel out of left field because for *me* the entire time i was viewing him specifically through the lens of american mass shootings and domestic terrorism as enacted on the small scale by hyper-privileged white men who will literally kill anyone who doesn’t cater directly to their wants and needs

but then! the mask came off and I found myself intensely frustrated by the way they turned this around. the severely obvious autisticly homoerotic coding that is so rampant in media for very specific kinds of obsessive villains, and the weird attempt at a sympathetic backstory—those just didn’t click for me and made me uncomfortable because they didn’t feel like they fit the MO that was actually displayed on-screen, which felt very heavily influenced by certain kinds of far-right online groups, IRL streamings of mass shootings, etc. like i don’t think that can be uncoupled from the depiction because to me as an american it felt extremely deliberate and very clear, but then again everyone is going to have different interpretations so i can’t say this is the correct way to view it, just the way i viewed it and thus the way it influenced my reading of the movie as a whole

like, to me, selina’s stuff felt like it fit pretty well. her struggles specifically, and her hatreds and personal motivations, and the way she and bruce responded to each other in ways obviously informed by their very different socioeconomic backgrounds, and her response when bruce has like zero empathy for her roommate, like that all made sense and fit with this story of this dude whose life does suck in a lot of ways but when compared to her life and her friends’ lives obviously he has waaaay more privilege and is still in the process of learning empathy and learning that other people matter (like alfred) so like THAT stuff worked for me. bruce realizing, oh, i should care about people, and selina trying to give him the hard truth that it sucks that he lost his parents but he had it fucking easy compared to most people in the world. THAT worked for me especially as i’m not looking for a hero who is inherently some paragon of virtue ordained by fate to be a perfect good-hearted soul. like fuck that, yeah he’s an idiot and an asshole sometimes but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t learn to do and be better.

but the stuff with the riddler felt like a really clumsy attempt to kind of emphasize that role of privilege and socioeconomics (and mental illness) but pasted onto the kind of person who is almost always privileged above their peers socioeconomically or emotionally, who is often catered to, and who feels it’s their right to make choices about the rest of the world, and that other people deserve whatever they get—like he absolutely does feel like he’s meant to be a direct mirror of what bruce could be, of that “she had it coming” attitude, but i don’t think that the poor crazy orphan bit really supports that in a way that feels genuine or interesting to me personally especially because of the way i read him and thus the way shooters and far right trolls were embedded contextually in my mind the entire time i was watching the movie. the way those kinds of people are treated by society at large—which is to often be given a pass that other people (especially black and brown, or mentally ill or disabled people) do not get. to have a platform, and not be removed. to commit a crime, and be detained without being murdered for existing, and so on and so forth.

like to me it genuinely would have made more sense for the riddler himself to be some fucking up-his-own-ass educated middle or upper class shithead who thinks he’s real clever, more than the dude who was raised in a shitty orphanage and is mentally ill and spooky for it, especially with as mentioned the lens that seemed to be present for me—that of the mass shooter.

but like i said my reading is probably different from other readings and is of course informed by my personal status as a poverty-line, neurologically disordered queer living in a country where death has become kind of a constant presence in the form of mass shootings, and racism-driven killings and state-sanctioned ableism and for-profit medicine and limited financial safety nets and domestic terrorism so on and so forth, even though i obviously don’t live in jersey

but also brief aside about the ~spooky craziness~, separate from all of that. the like, idk if it was the director or the actor or both or more than that, but his performance outside of the mask was deeply uncomfortable for me to watch because it feels intensely like, “one of these dudes saw an autistic or schizophrenic or other type of disabled person make weird noises in public once and that’s what this performance is” especially in the form of his aggrieved wailing in the prison cell. like that was SO distinctly familiar to me and it made me very uncomfortable to see that very specific behavior used in this way.

but it’s SO rampant in horror media especially, but also in superhero stuff where either it’s oh the spooky crazy weirdo or else the baby crazy pitiable creature, and it drives me nuts cause it’s so obvious how little understanding or empathy the people making these decisions have for mental illnesses, neurological disorders, learning disabilities, i mean even physical disabilities and birth defects are either treated as a punishment for some sin or else as a physical manifestation of a character’s evilness (dr doom) or even just as a fucking... it’s your fault you’re disfigured/disabled/whatever else (cough spider-man/deadpool cough)

so like, even with the minor plot about bruce’s mother and potentially the implications for bruce himself, as someone with my own disorder that genuinely prevents me from functioning (but not in a way that is “inconvenient” for others, just for myself and my mother) and with a younger sibling who is very visibly and noticeably autistic, having to sit in the theater and watch that performance was incredibly frustrating and uncomfortable for how obviously purposeful it was.

like i genuinely liked this movie a lot and i think it did a lot right especially tonally and stylistically, and there was a lot about its cinematography and script and sense of humor and seriousness that was really refreshing, and paul dano’s actual performance is like, well-done, but even though it was well done from a technical standpoint the notes it hit throughout the film felt deeply frustrating to me for the reasons i mentioned

i liked the other shit though, love the weird slapstick and the cinammontography and the use of darkness as a framing device and so on and so forth

it just, like every other superhero movie on the planet (including my beloved tasm) has a few glaring flaws that don’t inherently make it a movie that isn’t worth watching but that do instill a certain level of frustration in me (or sometimes just eye-rolling lmao)

[peakstories]

Common Questions and Information

What is peak trans?

Peak trans is the moment where you you begin to see the logical inconsistencies and cognitive dissonance within the trans movement which makes you realise that you can no longer (fully) support the trans movement.

The full, long definition which I like is this:

The moment when you realise that the trans movement is misogynistic, homophobic (and especially lesbophobic), full of autogynepiles, based on sexist stereotypes, full of circular reasoning, silencing (and attacking) those who disagree with them, silencing women who are affected by laws they wish to be put in place, ignoring science/statistics which go against their beliefs, based on beliefs rather than science and statistics, ignoring what people in their community are doing (as being trans is more important), and denying what other people in their own community are saying (because they’re not saying it). It’s the moment when you turn around and say ‘I cannot support this movement anymore’ because of all the reasons listed above.

But this definition from Urban Dictionary is also pretty good:

When the threshold of cognitive dissonance that the trans ideology requires of someone exceeds the limits of a person’s willing suspension of disbelief, and that person’s eyes open to where they can no longer agree with the narrative.

Who is this blog for?

This blog is open to everyone, regardless of if you are reading because you agree or hate-reading or just trying to understand other people’s side, my blog is open to you. I will only block people who harass me or attack people from the stories/on my posts.

What are TIM, TIF, and TRA?

TIM = Trans Identified Male (aka trans woman)

TIF = Trans Identified Female (aka trans man)

We use these acronyms in order to refer to trans people by their sex which makes things less complicated.

TRA = Trans Rights Activist. Basically a shorthand for anyone who unquestionably supports trans rights

Do you have trigger warnings?

There are two:

Trauma and Mental Illness

Eating Disorders

I am not the best at tagging so I may have missed some (which you can point out to me if you want to) but I try to make sure that they’re all tagged appropriately.

Where do most of these stories come from?

Many used to come from the subreddit r/GenderCritical and some from r/GenderCriticalGuys before the subreddits were banned by Reddit for ‘promoting hate’.

Some now come from the new Gender Critical group on SaidIt while others come from Spinster. Many are simply direct submissions.

How do you decide which stories I post?

I post all stories unless they have asked for their story to not be shared on different platforms or the story is riddled with slurs/obviously a troll. The moderators of r/GC, and now s/GC are very strict and good at removing those stories before I come across them, otherwise it’s just my own judgement on them.

What is ’peak queer’ and ’peak libfem’?

Much like peak trans, peak queer and peak libfem are reaching a point where you can no longer support these movement.

Peak queer, or peak TQ+, is no longer being able to support the micro identities which are often associated with trans activism such as pansexual/romantic, demisexual/romantic, allosexual/romantic, and omnisexual/romantic. Realising that many of these things are unnecessary identities for normal, human behaviour which exist because everyone wants to think that their feelings are special or unique.

Peak libfem is no longer being able to support the so-called ’feminist activism’ (really just conforming to patriarchal standards) which libfems support including sex-positivity/sex work is work, supporting make-up (culture), the massive support of trans activism at the expense of women’s rights, and calling everything a (free) choice so feminist.

What is a trans widow?

Trans widow is a term for people, although mainly women, who have married someone who later came out as trans which causes the end of their relationship. Their trans partner changes so much (including personality, likes/dislikes, the way they act, style, etc) in the process of transitioning/figuring out their gender identity that they become a completely different person. These changes mean that the person they originally fell in love with and married is effectively dead which gives them the name trans widows.

There’s a really good TEDTalk by a trans widow on the subject. There’s also an organisation called Trans Widow Voices to help support and raise awareness of trans widows.

List of Tags

Submissions and Tags: Stories which were submitted directly to this blog or which we reblog as we were tagged. (Links will eventually be added)

GC Reddit: Stories from Gender Critical Reddit (RIP r/GenderCritical)

GC Saidit: Stories from Gender Critical SaidIt

Spinster: Stories from Spinster

WoC Stories: Stories written by women of colour

Racism: Stories about racism by TRAs

TIMs: Stories with a TIM in (see above for definition)

TIFs: Stories with a TIF in (see above for definition)

Non Binary: Stories with someone who identities or used to identify as non-binary

Libfems: Stories which contain libfems, that is trans allies (especially allied women) who are not allies themselves and who also support choice feminism (eg: women can choose whatever they want with no analysis as to why women choose certain actions and why it could be harmful to them)

Peak TQ+: Stories about people reaching peak TQ+ or peak queer (see above for definition)

Peak Libfem: Stories about people reaching peak libfem (see above for definition)

Trans Widow: storiees by trans widows (see above for definition)

Misogyny: Stories containing some misogyny towards women

Internalised Misogyny: Stories about women dealing with their own internalised misogyny

Female Socialisation: Stories which include how women have been socialised a certain way, how TIMs don’t exhibit these signs, or denying that TIMs have not experienced this socialisation since they’re male

Silencing of Women: Stories which includes TRAs activly silencing women on certain issues

Female Spaces and Services: Stories which include female-specific spaces and services, normally being invaded by TIMs

Female Sports: Stories including TIMs in female sports

Male Privilege and Behaviour: Stories which include men (especially TIMs) acting with male privilege, showing typical male entitlement, overt misogyny and misunderstanding over what it is to be a woman, making male threats (ie: rape threats or anything about how they’re bigger/stronger/have a dick), etc

Stereotypes: Stories which show that TRAs really see gender as conforming to a specific set of stereotypes. 

Homophobia: Stories containing homophobia (including fetishisation of gay people)

Lesbophobia: Stories containing lesbophobia (including fetishisation of lesbians)

Conversion Therapy Rhetoric: Stories containing conversion therapy rhetoric. Lesbians must like dick, gay men must like pussy, etc.

Internalised Homophobia: Stories about people dealing with their internalised homophobia

AGPs: Stories about autogynephilia which is men who get aroused at the idea of being a woman

Trans Obsession: Stories which contain people completely obsessing either over themselves being trans or trans stuff, to the point it appears to dominate their life or at least dominates how they interact with others

Trans Entitlement: Stories showing trans people/their allies seeming to be entitled to certain things (including sex, certain spaces, etc)

Trans People in Their Own Words: Stories which show someone peaking at least in part due to actual things actual trans people have directly said to them

Trans Harassment: Times trans people and/or their allies have harass people

Trans Violence: Times trans people and/or their allies have been violent, including harassment with a lot of threats of violence

Trans Abusers: Stories containing trans people who are/were abusive

Trans Children: Stories containing trans children

Cult Tactics: Times when TRAs use the same tactics cults have used to keep people in line.

HRT and transition: Stories about people who have gone through or are going through some kind of medical transition from puberty blockers to HRT to surgeries

Detransition: Stories by or about someone who has detransitions

Biology is a TERF: Stories which contain TRAs not understanding or denying biology which includes: denying that sex matters in any way, ignoring sex based issues, complete misunderstand or even abuse of intersex disorders, etc

Eating Disorders: Trigger warning tag for mentions of eating disorders

Trauma and Mental Illness: Trigger warning tag for mentions of trauma (eg: severe abuse, rape, etc) or mental illness.