they're so full of themselves they cannot conceive of someone who doesn't want to comply with them and get a moment of fame on TV. that person denying to be on camera probably destroyed his mood for the whole day as he wondered what he did- "there's no way she hates me so much she doesn't want to be seen on TV next to me... I'm famous!"
experbia
joined 8 months ago
been noticing the conservatives on Twitter freaking out over the music rights thing, rattling on about how "music should be for everyone". which is a hoot, because like, wait, you're telling me you want to take the property of someone else, which they invested time and money into producing, and redistribute it to all people who want it?? HMMMM that sounds like something...
I've had a few folks delete their tweets but for the most part they just ignore it or call me very stupid and evil (their go-to when they have no argument) lmao. I actually engaged one Maga musician because he was afraid of what would happen if we allowed the right's "musical socialism" discussion to continue.
they call him Genocide Joe if they think it will bother the liberal they're speaking to. if they think it will hurt their enemy, they do not require something they say to align with their principles.
if we get hurt whether we help people or not, shouldn't we just always help people? we're gonna get slapped anyway.
guys who have actually big dicks tend to understate them on grindr and stuff. it's easier to undersell it and let them discover in person than it is to tell the truth and have to deal with the "oh really? I doubt it." bullshit every single time where suddenly everyone is a CSI photoshop-detecting photography genius. better to just fly under the radar as average and exceed expectations once they can't argue it's "just the angle".
saaame. I am very unintentionally Maga coded. I went to a pride event recently and to get in I was walking past it to get to the end of the line. walked past a single guy (white, little pudgy, your average 20 something Maga) holding Trump signs and I walk past and he goes "hey brother! wanna--" and goes to hand me a sign and I couldn't help the look of disgust I gave him with a little "ugh.." and he seemed absolutely gutted. he was gone when I got back to the same corner while in line. I like to think he saw me waiting in line and couldn't face the threat of conflict over his mistake.
the more I learn about the minutia of this movie, the more incredible it becomes. what geniuses lmao
happens more than you might think. 4chan is a weird unique place. it's mostly unmoderated, which makes it the default locale for a lot of unsavory people tossed out of all the nice clubs. but it's not ONLY the unsavory people (the worst of which tend to keep to themselves anyway)
mostly, the result of the low level of moderation and lack of personal control over what you see (no "feeds" or anything, it's just a plain forum) is that you see a lot of people "raw".
they have no account attached to their posts, certainly no real identity. can this make shitty people feel emboldened to say shitty things? yes. can it lead to surprisingly meaningful moments of actual vulnerability between people who have no reason to hide? yes that too.
most of the non-extremist users of the site are, I think, people who prefer and engage with the latter, while just scrolling past the cringe edgy teenagers and dollar tree nazis thinking they have a secret club.
it is hard to find this kind of honesty and depth on other social media sites. reddit was a bit closer than the rest for a while when they had a very liberal registration policy (email didn't even need to be verified so throwaway accounts were common and accessible) but I think they've cracked down on that a bit in the name of ad profile profitability. even having an account that can "be found" by people you know or future friends you meet on the site can keep you from being willing to be totally open. on low-moderation anonymous forums like 4chan, there's no reason to worry about your "persona" or reputation. in fact, users who seek either tend to be universally ridiculed for it and told to return to other vapid sites.
it also has a reputation for its users being, um, generally some kind of neurodivergent. I think this is because of the very low quantity of social rules that have any consequence. social rules are exhausting, easier to just stay quiet past a certain point.
I think it's more about the attempt than the result. historically, we get a lot of promises of strong leadership and then no attempts to even start following through. in my opinion, this is a massive source of voter apathy both in general but especially among young people. "why bother? they're all liars anyway, nobody will really try to help us once they're in" - the kids energized into politics with Kamala's campaign will wither or defect permanently if she makes these promises and they vote for her because of it and she does the usual routine of ignoring them until reelection season swings around again. if they want any hope of banking on the new energized kids in future elections, she has to at least try and she has to be loud about doing it. if she doesn't, this will win us only 4 years.
when companies pay lobbyists to change laws and it doesn't work, they retry and retry and retry until they do it. same with unpopular surveillance and "security" bills. but when talk of important social reform come up, dems go "ehhh, it's unlikely to pass... don't even try, it's not worth it. it will just be a hassle..."
like yes, the prez cannot just make dictates to change laws like people wish. other parts of government have to be engaged to do these things. so... ENGAGE THEM
what exactly do these corporations think aggrieved widows and widowers will do when they go to hold companies to justice and are told "no justice for you peasant, get out"?
do they think everyone who has just lost their life will go "ok... I'll just live with that then, thank you Disney"? lmao
i can't understand for the life of me why all these organizations want to remove the systems we built as a society to act as sensible alternatives to violence. do they want to be violenced?
it's so fucked how often they're right to be suspicious about motives but only apply that suspicion to other industries or groups who aren't trying to trick them, and never their own, which are. I guess the first step a cult must take is immunize people against being affected by any other outside forces, malicious or not. they'll always implicitly trust the cult leaders who "let them in" on how their control works.
view more: next โบ
๐ข I know, I'm sorry, I'm trying