#Online Misconduct

[flashdyke]

Being accused of sexual misconduct as a famous man really just makes you a martyr in the eyes of your fans. Russell Brand got a standing ovation last night because of the allegations against him. You watch the discussions people are having online, and as is shocking to nobody, his supporters think everything he did is completely justifiable and acceptable behaviour. He’s their special darling whose sexual interest in abusing children is only being turned into a problem because the man who presented for the BBC, Channel Four and MTV, has been on the biggest stand up and panel comedy shows in the UK, done major films, is or has been friends with half of the entertainment industry for decades, who has millions of followers on YouTube and other major content platforms, is somehow anti-establishment.

[molsno]

it really is so telling how tme people only start caring about transmisogyny when it affects tme people. it's the reason why a crossdressing cis man getting banned from an online platform for "sexual misconduct" is news that gets them to critique the absurdity of the rules. it's the reason they only discuss the flaws with bathroom bills in terms of how they cause cis women to come under suspicion of being trans for not meeting certain beauty standards. it's the reason they only discuss the cruel punishments doled out to people for failing to meet an unreasonable standard of masculinity when it affects men, both cis and trans. trans women are disproportionately hurt by all of these things and always have been, but even though they put our lives in very real physical and social danger, tme people don't care, because we're acceptable targets to them. because as long as we're being punished, they can be reasonably sure that they'll be shielded from the worst of it. that's why when they aren't shielded from it, it finally gets them to talk about it, but only to say that it was unfair that it happened to them. they get more protection, and nothing really changes for us. rinse and repeat, ad infinitum.

#txt #transmisogyny #my writing #1k

[sals-sonic]

I find it funny how people (antis usually) think that discourse regarding fiction and reality is a recent internet phenomenon. The terms "proshipper" and "antishipper" are relatively new, but the basis of it all has been going on for way longer than that.

In the novel "Madame Bovary" (1856) by Flaubert, the anxiety that readers, specifically women, would be brainwashed by fiction is channeled by Bovary herself, who "made her hands dirty with books from old lending libraries". With the "books" in question being romance novels, Flaubert not so subtly implies that works of fiction are the reason why Bovary ends up idealising her idea of love to the point that she commits acts of adultery in attempt to escape a reality that had become monotonous as a result of her novel reading.

Even in "Northanger Abbey" (1817) by Jane Austen, the protagonist, Catherine Morland, has a warped sense of reality, and it is said that it's because of her love for Gothic novels. Different from Flaubert though, who seemed to discourage women from reading romance novels altogether, a major plot point of Austen's novel is how Catherine needs to learn how to separate fiction from reality, meaning that a good relationship with novels can be achieved if only they aren't seen as a blueprint for living life. She also mocks her fellow authors who belittle their own readers while still publishing the books they strive to censor, and blames the reader's ability to differentiate fiction from reality, rather than the novel genre itself.

While terminology might have changed, the topic has remained about the same at the bare essentials, which are perfectly reflected in what both antishippers and proshippers argue about on the regular. The former believing that fiction affects reality on a 1:1 basis and that problematic elements must be identified as such so not to brainwash the reader into romanticising them, while the latter sees a distinction between fantasy and action, thinking that it's not the piece of fiction that perpetuates misconduct, but that the responsibility lies within the reader and their discretion.

The fact that this discourse now happens online rather than in the novels you study in class, does not take away any validity from it. Fandom spaces and ships are treated no differently than how novels were in the 19th century, with antis doing anything they can to censor whatever they deem to be problematic, as they fear that readers may glorify the (fictional) abuse irl, similarly to how Victorians censored works in order to "shelter" women.

At the end of the day, it's not only about being an antishipper or a proshipper, it's whether you consider yourself to be pro censorship or pro artistic freedom, and there's simply no other way to put it.

#anti censorship #pro fic #pro fiction #proship #proship please interact #pro ship #my post #discourse

[starsandhughes]

Penalty Box— Imagines Edition: Misconduct

SERIES MASTERLIST

summary: trevor gets ejected from the last game of the season, so y/n goes to deal with the damage

warnings: cursing, not so fluffy but there is some ish

word count: ~1k

you were out of your seat the second the scrum in front of the bench ensued. you loved a good fight, and frankly, trevor had every right to retaliate. it was no longer exciting when you saw trevor still arguing with the linesman in the box. last time he did that he ended up with a two minute unsportsmanlike misconduct, so you could only imagine what price was being set for him to pay.

the second trevor was escorted out of the box you knew you had to go see him to try and settle some of the dust. you got up and barely said a word to jamie, but you knew he was following you to ensure no one stopped you from getting back there.

“are you gonna-“

“you don’t wanna know, drysdale,” you cut him off.

“i’m staying outside?”

“you’re staying outside,” you confirmed.

trevor was going to be mad. you were going to be there for him, and you were going to be sweet, but first you had to dial him down. you couldn’t gauge the situation yet, but you were prepared for the worst.

you didn’t bother knocking, because if he was 0.2 seconds away from exploding, a knock wasn’t going to be heard.

“trevor zegras, what in the name of hell happened out there?!” you shouted as you flew open the door. trevor whipped his head around over to you. he was still in his jersey and pads, but his bucket and gloves had been thrown into his stall.

“what happened out there?! you saw what happened out there! i was checked and ended up with a penalty! the linesman—“

“i saw the shove, z! i get it, i really do. but you still fought, and that’s what gave you the roughing minor! which isn’t a big deal! danault got two for roughing with you! i don’t know what the fuck grant did, but at least he accepted his!”

“i didn’t—“

“uh huh, no sir, i am not finished!” you growled. trevor was still fuming, but he stood down. “what happened to the heart to heart with dallas, huh? you came home and had one with me about cutting down on your penalty minutes, too! tripping, hooking, interference, i don’t care about those! i know i post about your penalties and cheer for the fights; and fights are okay, they happen. it’s the arguing with the linesman and refs that is getting you in trouble and puts a damper on your name.”

“i know that,” trevor sighed, finally sitting down.

“do you? do you know how much it hurts seeing people talk shit about you online? calling you immature? when older players act the way you do, it’s encouraged. but you know what they don’t frequently do? argue with linesman. get multiple unsportsmanlike misconducts. you deserve to be angry right now, but you need to realize that the second half of what you did tonight was not okay. you are one of the best people i know, and have been since the day i met you. you can be sweet and nice! i’ve seen you have casual conversations with linesman! but they pick on you and give you extra penalties that might not be deserved because of this reputation you’re building.”

trevor didn’t answer. he saw in his stall with his head down, hands clasped, and right knee shaking like a storm. you sighed and knelt down in front of him.

“can i touch you?” you asked gently. you took his hands and pulled them apart to hold them in your own when he nodded. “i’m upset with you. i’m not mad, but i’m not all that happy. and i hate that you’re angry right now because this isn’t how your last game of the season should be and i’m so sorry that it is. you deserve better than this, my love, but to get better, you have to be better.”

trevor squeezed your hands and nodded.

“i know,” he said low.

“can i sit next to you? or are you still cooling off and need me in front of you?”

“i want you to sit next to me.”

you squeezed his hands again as you stood up. trevor scooted over in his stall and put his head on your shoulder the second you sat down. it was a bit uncomfortable with his shoulder pads, but it was worth it. you traced up and down the veins on his arms and breathed with him in silence to help him calm down.

hearing the silence, jamie took the risk of cracking open the door, “hey, is everything okay? jonesy and carrick have been out here for a while now.”

“what the hell did they do?” you laughed.

“we fought a little too much!” you heard jonesy yell, getting a laugh out of you.

you allowed the three of them to enter, giving a kiss to your boyfriend’s cheek as you got up to allow the boys to do whatever they needed in the locker room in peace.

“do we get kisses, too?” jonesy joked. you rolled your eyes and stood on your toes to kiss both of the newly ejected ducks, and gave one to jamie, too, before slipping out.

“will we make the post?!” carrick called out.

“you’ll make the caption!” you yelled back.

all you heard were the cheers and high fives as you walked out the door. it was a mess of a season, and this was a mess of a night, but at least your boys had their team.

#penalty box series: bonus editions #penalty box series #penalty box series: imagines #trevor zegras #trevor zegras x reader #trevor zegras x hughes reader #trevor zegras au #trevor zegras imagine #anaheim ducks #jamie drysdale #quinn hughes #jack hughes #nhl imagine #hockey imagine #nhl

[finelinens]

it's really just amazing how so many people continue to prove time and time again that they don't actually care about victims of grooming or sexual misconduct. they only care about moral grandstanding and making themselves look Good by making others look Evil. i really hate to break it to you, but you simply cannot make yourself into a Good Person by condemning the people you've deemed to be Bad. you need to actually work on yourself so that the Good within you is stronger. it takes effort and care. i know we all have a million reasons to be angry all the time, but anger and hate will never transform into kindness and compassion unless you actually try sometimes. you are not the arbiter of truth and moral purity, you're just another chronically online person like the rest of us

[lesbiandatekaname]

The "Rusty Quill Article" from the perspective of a journalism student.

So there has been a lot of stuff going around about an article made by someone that lays out some possible/probable/whatever misconduct. And there are some ways that people have been discussing it that I want to weigh in.

My Credentials: I'm in my senior year as a Journalism and Media Production major (I won't say which university because this is the internet). I've taken a lot of courses about journalism, including its ethics and writing conventions.

The Writer

"Who's Afraid of Alex J. Newall?" was written by Newt Schottelkotte on Medium and edited by Tal Minear and Wil Williams. The article extensively details possible misconduct

Possible bias: Upon publishing the article, Schottelkotte made no note of being the Director of Marketing at the podcast network Fables & Folly. When this was pointed out online, Schottelkotte added an editor's note to the bottom of the article that reads

Newt Schottelkotte is currently the Marketing Director for Fable & Folly Network, but has worked as an independent creator and journalist for longer. This information was not disclosed; a disclosure has been added.

So what gives? That's pretty biased, right? Surely F&F stands to gain a lot if Rusty Quill were to shut down or lose public favor, and the author hid that fact. I, however, would take that with a heavy grain of salt. As noted Schottelkotte has worked independently in podcasting since 2016 and got their position at F&F this year. Furthermore, they've actually worked for a lot of podcast networks, also available in that link, and the emphasis on F&F made by some people may be a bit overzealous. Yes, F&F could stand to gain from RQ experiencing troubles (though more of the nebulous way that a lot of podcast networks would), but Schottelkotte overall is an independent contractor and that's probably the reason they didn't mention it in the article originally. Minear and Williams are unaffiliated with F&F.

Something else about journalistic bias: No article is ever truly unbiased. There is no way for it to be. There are some cases where bias is so blatant that the person shouldn't be put on the story, but most of the time the best people are able to do is manage their bias.

The Purpose

Some people have disparaged the article for trying to "cancel" RQ. To this I would merely like to point out that the article is not addressed to podcast consumers, but to podcast creators.

They do address the possible consumers later towards the end, where they attempt to dissuade people from harassing former/current employees and projects

In the final section, they do ask readers to think about supporting The Magnus Protocol Kickstarter with the clear bent of "Supporting the Kickstarter could mean that you're supporting abusive industry practices." There is clearly some biased language here, and a call to action such as this could definitely be considered "iffy" journalism, so take that as you will.

The Sources

Oooooooooh the sources. Schottelkotte's article uses a few external sources, and then a number of anonymous sources that are ex-employees of RQ or people who were offered a position there. All interviewees are anonymous, and people have raised some eyebrows at this.

In journalism you are generally supposed to avoid confidential sources. They cause an obvious verification issue. If people don't know who your sources are, how do they know that you're not just making everything up?

That being said. The audio drama podcast industry is rather small. RQ itself is somewhat of a household name, and is even more of a juggernaut in a place like Britain. I can absolutely understand why these people would feel nervous about speaking publicly for fear of being blacklisted due to being considered "hard to work with" or "disloyal" or fear of backlash from RQ themselves. Take these sources with a grain of salt, but also understand that there are reasonable grounds for these sources being confidential.

Conclusion

I encourage people to go read the article, hence why I linked it at the beginning. Something that I would ask for people who point out the issues with sources is to demand accountability from RQ. Demand that they respond (As Schottelkotte asked them to do at least once, possibly several times. It's a bit unclear in the article). Look at the facts that we do know and ask yourself that even if they don't directly verify claims do they at least line up with them? Journalism is meant to inform, but there can also be more beyond a dichotomy "this article is can be trusted" vs. "this article cannot be trusted." Use this as an opportunity to ask questions.

#rusty quill situation #rusty quill

[toomuchracket]

important 75-related non-fanfic post/psa (tw for sexual abuse/misconduct):

i don't know how many of you have been keeping up with the abrams brothers drama on twt (those two guys who just appear at shows. one of them copied matty's tats, basically) or are aware of the issues surrounding them (r*pe apologists through supporting russell brand, sexual assault/misconduct/harassment, generally just making younger (mostly female/femme presenting) fans feel uncomfortable at shows), but there's a movement that's been started to try and make band management aware of these issues and the fact a lot of fans have both historically and recently made to feel very uncomfortable and unsafe by the abrams' (who are frequently invited backstage to meet the band, fyi) presence and behaviour at shows AND online. if you'd like to get involved, you can email the following addresses and express concern about their behaviour:

[email protected] (oborne's email)

[email protected]

[email protected] (tour manager's email)

more information can be found on twitter if you need. thank you. stay safe, everyone <3

#mads muses #important bits

[wildpeachfarm]

The internet space is overdue for a reckoning in how we deal with allegations of misconduct. It’s not just Minecraft creators. I’ve recently caught up with the Chuggaconroy situation and it’s incredibly tragic for all parties involved. (It ended up being a very grey situation that got spun into black and white due to vindictive omission of key details to the story, and Chuggaconroy had to be institutionalized after making an attempt on his life). Lady Emily, the person responsible for the initial allegations, has a history of adding fuel to the fire in situations affecting other creators like Quinton Reviews and ProJared. I think people still cannot fathom how intense and punishing a trial by internet and public shaming can be until they experience it themselves and honestly it’s quite concerning to watch. I’ve also noticed that autistic people, who are more prone to making social faux pas, are often the primary targets of these hate campaigns that try to paint them as irredeemable monsters or creeps.

oh I think the last thing you said is an AMAZING point that I don't see get brought up often. People will preach online about supporting those with poor social skills or reading social queues incorrectly and then are so quick to shit on someone who does that and immediately attributes malice to their actions when confusion is FAR MORE REASONABLE.

I do think the "support victims" mindset has gone too far off the deep end when people have started using that to justify blindly believing anyone who cries wolf instead of doing your due-diligence as a reasonable person and looking into further details and asking for clarification. ESPECIALLY when its a public accusations like the ones we see on the internet.

#ask #anon #anti drummyache tag

[anonanonacct]

PSA FOR USER RANDOMGOOBERNESS (Goob/Angel)

Goob has multiple issues surrounding racism, ableism, misconduct with minors, animal abuse, gore, and is an extremely manipulative individual.

They are currently active in the webcomic, HLVRAI, and Warrior Cats communities. They've previously been active in the FNAF and ATLA fandoms. (thus why those fandoms have been tagged)

This document was compiled by four individuals and contains screenshots exposing Goob's behavior to warn others of their online presence. We are thankful for everyone who reads & interacts with this PSA.

 Do NOT go out of your way to doxx, harass, or raid their servers. Do not send hate anons, death threats, or try to hack their accounts. You will not gain anything by doing so. We do not encourage this kind of behavior in the slightest and find it despicable.

if you have had any experiences with Goob that you would like to share, please contact the ORIGINAL BLOG this post is from. Our DMs & Ask Box are open.

EDIT: Clearing up any misconceptions

None of this PSA was written in bad faith. The authors believe that with time and effort, Goob could change.

99% of these screenshots were public information from public servers or servers with members that wished to step forward about their experiences. The few messages taken from DMs were properly censored and all context provided.

Screenshots were not taken out of context. Any single message screenshot is a one-off message or had no relevant context. The reason why this document is so long is because of the context added.

It does not matter that Goob was 17 in a small percentage of these screenshots. These are repeated issues to them being 21 (and some situations still are extremely inappropriate if Goob was 17 anyway.)

Finally: No, this could not of been handled "privately". Attempts have been made and failed. Goob is stubborn and uses DMs to attempt control over the situation. They do not admit wrong doings.

#kill count #randomgooberness #hlvrai #half life but the ai is self aware #warrior cats #fnaf #atla #webcomic #original

[f0point5]

Honestly, as a woman I have to say it is very interesting to me how different people have handled the Christian Horner investigation compared to the allegations against Susie Wolff a while back for example.

Bc I remember the outrage online for the Susie one was big and people were crying misogyny so bad the FIA finished/dropped their investigation after one (1) day and everyone was happy.

Christian was investigated by an independent investigator hired by the RedBull company not RedBull Racing. He was, supposedly, interrogated for 8 hours and investigated for weeks. Now the investigation has exonerated him but people will still rather believe rumors they read in a newspaper than the official result.

I myself am a little disappointed by the lack of transparency by RedBull but the hypocrisy in this is astounding.

I think society really has slipped too far into “believe all victims”. Because there was never even a confirmed victim. And people were still there with pitchforks.

As a woman, I feel bad for Christian’s wife, and his kids. He’s got daughters old enough to understand what people have been saying about their father, based on absolutely nothing. No one thinks about those women.

No one thinks about the fact that if every time a female makes a complaint about something, people just to accusing the guy of sexual misconduct, that it sets the precedent that women in the workplace are only to be sexualised. Or the fact that if every time a woman makes a complaint, a man is convicted in the court of public opinion before there’s any evidence (only to be acquitted when it turns out it was a rumour) it sets the precedent that these claims can very rarely be taken seriously. Or the fact that assuming any sexual misconduct in the office is entirely harassment by the man, infantilises and patronises women in the workplace. People are so quick to protect “victims” that they end up creating them out of thin air.

As much as I’d have liked to know the whole story, I think it’s good that Red Bull is not bowing to pressure to release details. They don’t owe anyone transparency. That employee filed a complaint with their employer, they didn’t call de telegraaf to make accusations. They didn’t go on TikTok to make this news. Their privacy should be protected. As should Christian’s. This is a company, not a government, they don’t answer to F1 Twitter. People have got way too comfortable demanding information they are not entitled to when it comes to “public figures”, especially in this sport. Good for Red Bull for reminding the mob of their place. (I do agree that Theresa certain amount of hypocrisy because I think they leaked the investigation themselves, but I have no proof of that and I think that it’s the best decision to give this the privacy it should have had all along)

#f1 #formula 1 #christian horner #red bull racing

[caffeineandsociety]

Big problem with online trans discourse is that a lot of people - including other trans people - 100% believe that trans people are the gender we say we are, and that transitioning is not Just A Weird Sex Fetish Thing, in the abstract. Theoretically. But once confronted with actual trans people that dissolves away pretty quickly.

A lot of people out there who try to be trans-positive will gladly believe any accusation of sexual misconduct against a trans person - ESPECIALLY trans women because of the whole "deception" stereotype. "No, no, it's not because they're trans, I just like to Believe Victims," someone will say, despite the fact that any evidence is...flimsy at best - they liked a children's cartoon, they like erotic horror, they like a Bad Ship, they refused to dogpile someone for liking a Bad Ship, they made a joke about their genitals in a strictly adult space, they flirted with someone once (and stopped when it wasn't reciprocated but let's just ignore that clearly they still WANT to and THINKING is the SAME as HARASSING) - oh, they're obviously a predator, and saying that accusation is transphobic is trivializing transphobia!

A lot of people out there who try to be trans-positive will tell transmascs that they're "dominating the conversation" if they're doing ~10-25% of the speaking - which is...even less forgiving than where cishet men will usually see women as dominating the conversation (25-30%). Transmasc exclusionism hinges on this concept. We need to sit down and be quiet like good little girls responsible people aware of the dangers of male privilege because perfectly stealth trans men make 90% of what their cis male counterparts make rather than 80% so clearly there's no difference between us at all! We need to make ourselves small and ~remember it's okay to be feminine~.

It's, uh, how can I put this? Bad.

[apricitystudies]

i'm thinking of making "deep dive" reading lists like my monthly ones on specific topics, starting with criminology. vote for your fave :)

#studyblr #studyspo #reading recommendations #academia #criminology

[sweetie-peaches]

Hi everyone, hi I’m not a sweetie, is a-ghost, and anyone in your little discord my posts are being shared to. Hello.

I would like to apologize sincerely for my continued harassment and misconduct, clearly it insulted your minuscule egos. I am not afraid of you. You do not know me, you do not know who I am. I made a joke , you got mad. Deal with it.

If you think I’d apologize for anything at all you’re dumber then I thought you were.

Let’s remember why you got posted to twitter. And why I did, shall we? You got posted because of your ableism and defense of abuse. I got posted because someone from your posse of crows sent me a death threat. Let’s be fucking real.

Anyway, you are a bully. That’s all you are.

And for your question, yes, I am a child, I have never lied about being a child. but what does that make you when you fume at the idea of me making fun of you? You are twenty something years old, and yet you don’t act like it.

Does it make you mad? When I make fun of you? When my friends talk about you? Do you type up those supervillain ass posts because you think it makes you look cool to your sad excuse of a fanbase?

A few months ago you told me that you understood the harassment I got, do you? You are the fucking cause of it. You are the reason we get harassed.

And fuck it. I’ll say it, what you say makes me fucking pissed, it makes me upset. At least I have the balls to say that.

I hope you look at yourself in the mirror and feel bad for what you say. I hope your words fucking stick to you forever.

Sincerely, fuck you.

And to everyone who follows me, and to my mutuals, and to anyone who sees my page and feels just a bit of joy, thank you. I know I don’t make it easy, I know I’m stupid, but you care enough to see me and like what I have to say. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

I’m not going to be online. I’m tired.

Goodnight. And im sorry i have to make this post.

#peaches posts #important

[bk-179]

What is KOSA? (And how could it kill kids?) [an educational comic by Bkay-179]

text will be posted below. Image ID is EXTREMELY appreciated- it will help more people learn about KOSA.

Hello! This is Bkay speaking. Today, I would like to explain the KOSA bill, a re-proposed, updated American bill from 2022 that will be voted on in the senate on February 26, 2024.

In this comic, I will explain the ramifications of this bill on the internet, both in the United States and internationally, if it were to eventually become law.

This bill is dangerous. Essentially, it is a bill proposing that websites and social media platforms censor content “unsafe for kids”, including sex education, LGBTQIA+ resources, information pertaining to gender affirming care, domestic violence and abuse aid, and much more.

In addition, it will pressure websites and social media platforms to collect extremely private information to both confirm the age of its users and to enforce parental consent guidelines for account creation.

Let’s start simple: What is KOSA?

KOSA is an American bill that aims to protect minors on the internet against content deemed harmful. It advocates for the identification of minors on a platform, especially social medias like TikTok and Tumblr, and the subsequent removal of “design features” deemed to “…encourage or increase the frequency, time spent, or activity of minors on the covered platform, or activity of minors on the covered platform” (Don’t Fall for the Latest Changes, 1)

So, it sounds like a bill that protects minors online, something we’ve needed for a while now. Sounds great, right?

Wrong.

KOSA is a censorship bill. The true purpose of the bill is to censor websites, platforms, and even games that the State Attorney Generals of each state do not like, especially ones that are used to spread information about gender, sexuality, sex education, and much, much more.

The bill will pressure companies and websites alike to verify the ages AND identites of their users, effectively killing anonymity and privacy for everyone, NOT just those in America.

The bill is intentionally vague, and uses this vagueness to place liability on platforms in the the event that minors are exposed to anything the State Attorney General of any given state is opposed too (which, as stated before, is marginalized communities, health information, sex education, and more).

This pressure and liability will push companies and websites to collect sensitive information; information that will be used to identify not only age, but identity.

It will be impossible to connect, discuss government and police misconduct, and organize rallies and protests, among other items protected by the first amendment, safely. The internet will no longer be anonymous. Everyone in any country that wishes to use these services is in danger if they use these platforms; especially minors.

Most importantly, the children won’t be safe. Far from protecting minors, the effects listed previously will contribute to the death of queer, trans, neurodivergent, POC, and abused children everywhere, especially in America where the censorship will be most prominent.

Protecting minors on the internet is important. But KOSA is not only ineffective in doing so, but is not actually meant to protect kids. It is meant to keep children under strict control for political purposes, and either directly or indirectly, this bill will kill them.

However, there is still hope.

There are ways to voice your disapproval of this bill in a way that matters. If you are an American citizen living in the USA, no matter your age, you can contact your state representatives about this bill and make it clear that you do not support it. If you aren’t, there are still ways to support the cancellation of this bill. Spreading the word and educating people about the bill is especially helpful.

Below, sources will be linked to show  you ways to ACT, for both Americans and non-Americans.

We will not go down without a fight.

(Sources linked within the description of the original post in Comic Studio are as follows:

- Stop KOSA is a movement that will help people in America take action against the bill.

- from a reputable organization, detailing the dangers of KOSA.

- a petition anyone can sign. )

(Additional helpful links to international petitions that I posted in the comments are as follows:

I recommend searching for more ways to stop KOSA; everyone can help via petitions, but the most important way to kill support for this bill is educative anyone and everyone about its harmful effects.)

#KOSA #stop kosa #kosa 2024 #kosa bill #kosa act #kids online safety act #queer rights #lgbtq community #lgbtqia rights #trans rights #transgender rights #Mental health #KOSA kills kids #bad internet bills #internet censorship #censorship #black history #education #children’s rights #youth rights

[sibelin]

What's row 0? 😨

Hey anon! Row 0 is a zone during Rammstein concerts where pre-selected young (and obviously "sexy") women are invited to stand, dance and be pretty. There is a dress code that sounds very hot topic 2000s male fantasy ("sexy", "gothic", etc). These women are scouted online (usually on Instagram) for both coming to Row 0 and the afterparties with members of the band.

Now there was allegations of serious misconduct during the afterparties reported by several women in the last six months. Even if it seems the case have been legally dropped by justice, the Row 0 thing is still very icky to say the least. I don't want to support the groupie culture the band (or Till) are desperately hanging on to...

There are several posts on reddit if you need more informations!

#hope it's informative enough #i'm not going against rammstein fans i don't care #i just don't want to support the band or see them to often on my dash :) #ask

[samasmith23]

We need to talk about EssenceOfThought's ongoing bullying & slander campaign against Rachel Oates...

I normally don't make posts covering this kind of stuff since I mostly try to keep my Tumblr blog here relatively positive and cheerful. And I normally try to avoid YouTube drama in general. But recently I've become increasingly frustrated and angered by the behavior of a certain YouTuber whom I regrettably used to be a fan of awhile back known as "Essence Of Thought" (aka, Ethel Thurston), whom in the past 2 months has been continuously releasing multiple videos & shorts which slander and defame another YouTuber named Rachel Oates. I know that Rachel herself is currently trying to combat this situation and has even filed multiple claims against Ethel's videos, but I felt the need to try and show my support for Rachel by help signal-boost her story in response to Ethel's revived targeted harassment campaign against her.

Content Warning: Mentions of Transphobia, Cyberbullying, Self-Harm, Suicidality, and Child Abuse.

Also, while this post is going to be very critical of Ethel and her conduct, I will NOT tolerate any misgendering or deadnaming of her! Just because I think Ethel is a bad person does NOT excuse any transphobia that is directed at her, and I will immediately block and report anyone who engages in such reprehensible behavior!

Section 1: Confessions of a former fan, or my personal falling out with Essence of Thought

For those who are not aware, Ethel Thurston is a transgender atheist content creator who regularly produces video essays analyzing and criticizing TERFs and the broader far-right. This content greatly appealed to me as both a supporter of trans-rights and as someone who vocally opposes both TERFs and Neo-Nazis. However, exactly 1-year-ago I unsubscribed from Ethel's channel when she began made a series of videos accusing Lily Orchard of being a child groomer. While I do agree that Lily is an AWFUL person who has received multiple credible accusations of sexual abuse from both former partners and even her own younger sister Courtney, Ethel's videos which accused Lily of "grooming all minors in her audience" were actually heavily criticized by several former victims of Lily's abuse who have argued that the way Ethel & her editor "ABirdCalledLevi" (aka, Levi) presented their information against Lily was not only overly inflammatory, but only served to misrepresent and damage the testimonies of her other victims.

Specifically, critics like "Patchwork Heart" (aka, Shiloh Conner) took serious issue took issue with Ethel & Levi's constant liberal usage of the word "grooming" to describe Lily's actions towards individuals like Glade, who accused Lily of encouraging him on her Discord to watch a livestream where she repeatedly flashed her audience (Glade was still 17 at the time of this incident). Essentially Shiloh stated that while Lily was undeniably guilty of sexual harassment, neglectful misconduct, and indecent exposure, her behavior technically does not qualify as "grooming," since "grooming" is a term specifically meant describe the gradual breaking down of a victim's boundaries through manipulation and isolation from others (online it's usually conducted through private DMs rather than on public servers like Lily's channels). Furthermore, Shiloh and other fellow victim's of Lily's abuse also criticized Ethel & Levi's usage of the phrase "parasocial audience grooming" to argue that Lily was grooming her ENTIRE audience instead of individuals, as "parasocial audience grooming" is NOT a legally or medically recognized term, but was instead invented by the commentary YouTuber "Korviday" in 2020 to describe Shane Dawson's sexually abusive behavior towards several underage members of his audience. Essentially, it's impossible to groom an entire audience all at once since grooming is defined by the specific and deliberate targeting and manipulation of individuals in private or isolated settings with the intention of eventually sexually abusing them. But when criticized for the way they badly mishandled the testimonies of victims like Glade, Ethel & Levi instead doubled down by not only continuing to misuse the word "grooming" in their videos, but actively smeared and defamed their critics and other victims of Lily's like Shiloh as "abuse/groomer apologists.” Ethel even went as far as to compare Shiloh criticizing how she misrepresented Glade’s testimony to “defending Harvey Weinstein.”

Like... YIKES!

I'm not going to lie... when I saw the way Ethel & Levi actively bullied and slandered other victims of Lily Orchard, I was deeply disappointed and disgusted. While I was already starting to grow weary of Ethel's tendency to overly moralize in her arguments, and I knew she was unpopular in a lot of online spaces, for the longest time I tried to give both her and Levi the benefit of the doubt since I knew she had been harassed by TERFs like Graham Linehan past simply for being an outspoken non-binary trans-woman online. But the way Ethel bullied people like Shiloh Conner was simply inexcusable! And personally, I completely agree with Shiloh's criticisms against Ethel & Levi. Even though I dislike Lily Orchard and think that she's an abusive scumbag, spreading misinformation about issues as serious as CSA only serves to inflict further harm onto the people that Lily has hurt. Victims like Shiloh have very publicly stated that they either want their testimonies to be reflected as accurately as possible, or not at all. And I especially understand their concerns about misusing the word "grooming," especially because of how that word in particular has been so easily co-opted as an anti-LGBTQ+ slur by Republicans and the far-right in the past 2 years alone, which only serves to promote bigotry and obfuscate actual instances of child sexual abuse (Ethel claimed in their video that they "saw no harm in extending the definition of the word" BTW). Here's a link to Shiloh's video responding to Ethel if you want further details on the ways in which both she and Levi so badly mishandled the testimonies of Lily Orchard's victims BTW:

So how does Rachel Oates fit into all of this exactly? Well...

Section 2: Reevaluating Ethel's past conduct and the targeted bullying of Rachel Oates

Once I witnessed the ways in which EssenceOfThought bullied and smeared the victims of Lily Orchard's abuse, it honestly caused me to reevaluate and question a lot of their past content, especially because Ethel & Levi already had reputations of being overly inflammatory figures who've burned tons of bridges with lots of other leftist YouTubers. It was then that I was reminded of the biggest controversy Ethel's been involved in, and one I was only tangentially aware of before the Lily Orchard drama. That being Ethel's 4-year-long and currently ongoing defamation campaign against feminist and atheist British YouTuber, Rachel Oates.

The conflict between Ethel & Rachel all started back in 2019, when Rachel's friend and former atheist YouTuber "Rationality Rules" (aka, Steven Woodford), got into serious trouble when he posted a video arguing against the inclusion of trans-people in sports (which relied on heavily fallacious scientific data and even cited clips from Fox News, Ben Shapiro, and Joe Rogan). Unsurprisingly, the backlash against Woodford's video was enormous, and it even resulted in him being deplatformed from hosting a panel at an ACA conference in Austin, Texas that same year. However, a lot of Woodford's friends within the YouTube atheist community, including Rachel, argued that Woodford did not make his video out of intentional malice or bigotry, whilst fully agreeing that it was a terrible poorly-researched video that did serve to reinforce transphobic narratives even if it was unintentional. This led to Woodford not only delisting and demonotizing the original video, but also releasing both an apology and retraction video to try and help mitigate the damage his original video caused.

Ethel however, refused to accept Woodford's apology and retraction, and made several response videos accusing his apology of being fake and him continuing to spread transphobic misinformation. And while that's perfectly understandable if Ethel personally didn't find Woodford's apology to be adequate or genuine, where this crosses the line into unacceptable behavior is that Ethel then went onto repeatedly attack Rachel Oates simply because she was both friends with Woodford IRL and didn't want to get directly involved in the controversy. Essentially, Ethel is engaging in the "guilt by association" fallacy here. In actuality though, Rachel not only repeatedly stated that she disagreed with the content Woodford's original video and agreed that it was very bad and harmful, but that she is supportive of the trans community and felt unqualified to weigh in on the subject matter of trans-people in sports since she has barely any knowledge or interest about sports in general.

This response was not good enough for Ethel however, who instead misinterpreted Rachel's comments as a backhanded attempt at silencing Woodford's critics.

Things got even worse when a random fan messaged Rachel a screenshot taken from a private Facebook group from a trans-self-help group which compiled a list of public figures for the trans community to avoid following the Woodford controversy, and her name was included on that list. Rachel, not knowing that the list was from a private chat, immediately went on Twitter to defend herself, which led to Ethel accusing her of doxxing by publishing private information. This is in spite of the fact that not only did the screenshot already exist before Rachel discovered it, but she went out of her way to censor the names of the members of that Facebook group. Furthermore, Ethel had also blocked Rachel on Twitter which led to the latter asking some of her followers to show her what Ethel was stating about her so she could try to adequately defend herself, which in-turn resulted in Ethel accusing Rachel of sending her millions of followers to circumvent her block and harass her.

The situation escalated even further however, when Ethel posted a now infamous tweet to one of Woodford and Oates' friends' Lizzy Lang, not only described Woodford as a "violent transphobe intent on stripping away dozens of human rights,” but called Lang and others (presumably Oates) "members of Woodford's church a transphobia" before ending the tweet with the words, "do this world a favor and exit it."

That last line in Ethel’s tweet, “do the world a favor and exit it,” got a lot of people justifiably angry since it was very easily misconstrued as Ethel advocating for Woodford's defenders to commit suicide (she claimed it was meant to say “exit Woodford’s church of transphobia”). And while EoT later apologized and clarified the incredibly poor wording of that last comment, she still refused to apologize to Rachel after several months of targeted bullying and defamation. When Rachel saw the infamous tweet, it only served to amplify her pre-existing feelings of depression since she mistaken that tweet to be directed at her instead of Lizzy Lang. And a few days later, in an act of desperation Rachel posted an impromptu unedited video begging and pleading for Ethel to stop bullying her, not realizing that she was still badly bleeding from cuts on her arm due to feeling completely hopeless and isolated (Rachel already had a history of engaging in self-harm and cutting).

But not even Rachel engaging in self-harm nor her feelings of suicidality were enough to sway Ethel, who still continued to double-down on their harassment by arguing that Rachel "weaponizing self-harm, transmisogyny, and benevolent patriarchy," and was using "upper-class cis white woman tears" (even though Rachel has openly admitted to being lower-middle class). And to this very day, Ethel still continues to slander Rachel and falsely label her as a "serial transphobe" and "abuser" all throughout her videos, even going as far as to not only claim, "Rachel Oates' [abuse] was the second most psychologically destructive thing [she's] ever suffered, only being second to being raped as a child," but that she would rather relive her trauma of "being outed as bisexual, groomed at age 15, and sexually assaulted."

Seriously... FREAKING YIKES! Those are incredibly extreme and inflammatory statements to make! I do understand that Ethel is a CSA survivor (and on that level I 100% empathize with her because that is of course absolutely terrible and is one of the absolute WORST things anyone can suffer from), but claiming that someone circumventing a Twitter Block and or begging you to stop bullying her whilst feeling suicidal is even remotely comparable to “being raped as a child"?! That is so unbelievably insensitive on so many levels that I don’t even know where to start! It’s insensitive to not only Rachel herself, but to other CSA survivors as well since it trivializes their trauma! Ethel should know better than this!

Also, that screenshot of Ethel tweeting a link to a Guardian article discussing the weaponization of white woman tears? That was literally the top pinned-tweet to her Twitter account immediately days after Rachel posted that desperate video of her pleading to Ethel to stop her harassment campaign whilst feeling suicidal. What a truly vile and unempathetic thing for Ethel to do!

Section 3: Showing support for Rachel Oates

After I did more research into the whole EssenceOfThought Vs. Rachel Oates situation, as well as hearing Rachel's side of the story, I ended up subscribing to Rachel's YouTube channel and have since become a fan of her work. Before I eventually unsubscribed from Ethel's channel due to the way she similarly bullied several of Lily Orchard’s victims, I was given the impression by her that Rachel Oates was just another garden-variety TERF YouTuber based on he way Ethel constantly talked about her. But that’s NOT accurate at all… Rachel's channel from what I’ve seen is mainly just about discussions of secularism and religion, feminism, book reviews, and cute dog videos!

Seriously, her dog Kyra is so FREAKING adorable!

Look at her! Kyra's such a good girl! She's such a cute doggy!

But yeah, this is a prime example of how Ethel’s pattern of engaging in bad-faith moral absolutism while misrepresenting events and evidence can be seriously damaging to uninitiated viewers. And I say that not only as someone who was largely unaware of the full extent of what she had done to Rachel, but also because Ethel frames her content in a very pseudo-academic/intellectual manner and uses a lot of professional sounding words to try and disguise severely misguided and inflammatory arguments. She tries to portray her YouTube videos as if they’re akin to college-level essays with lots of citations and crap, which can easily fool people into thinking that her content is well-researched and sophisticated. Except looking below the surface, in hindsight Ethel’s videos are mostly just pretentious word-salad, cherry-picking evidence, and relying heavily on academic terminology in order promote her thinly-veiled absolutist black-&-white views on morality, attacking anyone who is “not progressive enough” for her (in addition to Rachel, Ethel & Levi have also done this to other leftist YouTubers like Lindsay Ellis, Philosophy Tube, & Suris the Skeptic). According to Ethel’s logic, you’re either an entirely good or entirely bad person, and there’s zero in-between and if you dare disagree with her to even the slightest degree then she’ll automatically consider you to be just as bad as the far-right. Basically, it’s moral absolutism.

All of Ethel’s fallacious claims against Rachel Oates are textbook examples of bad-faith moral absolutism, and I deeply regret the fact that I was ever once a fan of Ethel’s content. She is a bully and a liar. And that’s a conclusion I arrived to after seeing how Rachel’s stories about being repeatedly slandered & bullied by Ethel heavily paralleled the similar experiences of individuals like Shiloh Conner, thereby revealing a pattern of toxic behavior on Ethel’s part.

Section 4: Ethel’s renewed and current bullying campaign

So why do I bring all of this stuff up?

Well, even though the worst of the harassment Rachel suffered was back in 2019 and she has since tried to move on from this whole fiasco and continues making her usual feminist book reviews and dog videos (she even deliberately avoids mentioning EssenceOfThought by name in her videos...), Ethel has not only repeatedly tried to drag all of this drama back up, but has this singleminded obsessive vendetta to defame and destroy Rachel's YouTube career at all costs. For instance, in 2022 Ethel tried to further slander Rachel by yet again engaging in "guilt by association" fallacy because notable transgender TERF YouTuber "Rose of Dawn" (aka, the British equivalent of Blaire White) once tried to befriend Rachel in 2020 after the initial harassment campaign by Ethel, and later in 2022 Rose openly defended self-confessed genocidal serial rapist Lily Cade when the latter was platformed in an infamous transphobic BBC article. What Ethel completely neglects to mention however, is that Rachel had permanently stopped interacting with Rose when several members of her audience informed her that Rose is actually a TERF (and the way Rose suddenly tried to befriend Rachel after Ethel's bullying of her strikes me as very cult-like since TERFs sadly do have a history in engaging in incredibly abusive cultish tactics to recruit new members, as many people who have escaped that disgusting hate movement have reported...) and she has since apologized for ever giving Rose any attention. Regardless, Ethel still tried to falsely implicate Rachel alongside "Rose of Dawn" in a video condemning Lily Cade & the BBC, which led to Rachel rightfully filing a defamation claim to YouTube, getting Ethel's then-latest slanderous hit-peace against Rachel blocked in the UK.

But even worse however, is that starting in August 2023 Ethel has begun releasing a constant stream of videos continuing to smear Rachel even further by both repeating all of the exact same aforementioned slanderous claims along with a whole bunch of new ones. Like, not only has Ethel already released 3 main videos out of a planned 6-part series ranting about Rachel Oates, but she has also released 24 shorts taken from the main videos!

Geez! Not only is this beyond obsessive, but this is just straight-up targeted bullying and harassment on Ethel's part! And the new claims she makes against Rachel in these videos are equally slanderous as the ones before! For just one example, Ethel & Levi’s cite a now-deleted livestream of Rachel's that they re-uploaded as a mirrored-copy to their channel, accusing Rachel of denying trans-women's existence by making the offhanded comment of, “No, the only thing a man can provide me that a woman can’t is a p*nis. Only thing.”

Except… I actually went and watched the ENTIRE 3-hour mirrored livestream myself just to see the full context of Rachel’s quote, and it turns out that Ethel took that quote completely out of context! Not only are there lots of points in the livestream wherein Rachel repeatedly states that “gender is a social construct and that trans and non-binary people exist,” but during the stream she's doing a counter-response to a Christian fundamentalist incel who once responded one of her earlier videos. And that potentially problematic quote of Rachel’s, “No, the only thing a man can provide me that a woman can’t is a p*nis. Only thing,” was actually a sarcastic response to the incel’s homophobic argument that “women don’t want to love their equals [(aka other women)] because they actually all want what only a [dominant alpha male] can provide them.”

Essentially, Rachel was criticizing the incel’s sexist & homophobic “logic” that, “all women secretly only want p*nises,” in a snarky & sarcastic manner, but Ethel took Rachel’s comment out of context to try and instead paint it as some transphobic-slip-of-the-tongue/TERF-dogwhistle, accusing Rachel of “completely ignoring the existence of non or pre-op trans women,” in order to try and support the fallacious argument that, “Rachel Oates doesn’t actually view trans women as real women, but instead as props to objectify in order to make herself look like a better ally.”

Not once does Ethel ever mention the context that Rachel was responding to & mocking a bigoted incel during the livestream... at all...

I don't have time to go into all of the other new lies that Ethel & Levi are currently spewing against Rachel Oates since this post has already gotten incredibly lengthy (for instance, Ethel also claimed that Rachel “downplayed JK Rowling’s transphobia” simply because she used the words “incredibly problematic” to describe the Queen TERF’s bigoted views; which is such a weak and pedantic argument), but it’s a whole lot…

Conclusion

Overall, I just wanted to bring attention to this situation because EssenceOfThought's harassment campaign against Rachel Oates has been ongoing since 2019 and it shows ZERO signs of stopping anytime soon. Ethel & Levi are serial bullies and liars who regularly engage in bad-faith arguments, misrepresent evidence, and engage in moral absolutism in order to paint anyone who disagrees with them or makes even the slightest mistake as the worst people imaginable. So the more people who are made aware of this mess, the better.

Please show support for Rachel, whether that be through signal-boosting this post, subscribing to her YouTube channel, or even donating to her Patreon if you so choose.

And to EssenceOfThought, aka Ethel Thurston, (along with her editor Levi...) specifically, the famed basketball player Michael Jordan would have some choice words for you:

And I mean that sincerely. Seriously... just stop this targeted bullying & slander campaign against Rachel. It's incredibly unhealthy and obsessive. Just let it go already...

#rachel oates #EssenceOfThought is a bully #EssenceOfThought is a liar #EssenceOfThought is a moral absolutist #cw: cyberbullying mention #cw: self-harm mention #cw: suicidality mention #cw: child abuse mention #lily orchard is a predator #anti lily orchard #mini essay #tangent #serious post