I'm just a teenage dirtbag, baby.

I'm just a teenage dirtbag, baby

0 notes

Time for my monthly apology to my followers. I apologize for the copious amounts of wank I’m partaking in, specifically the much longer posts that clog up your dash over and over again. I’ve been tagging them all as #wank rather than teen wolf fandom problems, so if you wish to avoid them entirely, that’s what you should black list. If there’s something else more specific you’d like me to tag the wank as that’s already on your black list, let me know, you can tell me it on anonymous, I don’t really care. Let me know and I’ll make the adjustments.

Filed under text

42 notes

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn’t.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

And I should care about what you think, why?

It doesn’t matter what I think, or whether you care about it or not. You’re bullshitting all over this post instead of responding to the actual point of it, which is what you do. How many times have you asked people what gives them the right to speak for a group of people, when they’ve voiced an opinion common in the group they belong to? Coincidentally, it’s generally in a discussions about problematic shit sterek fans do. This is your defense, and it’s bullshit. Unlike you, I kept to the topic of your response. You just relied on red herrings, something that you seem to accuse every other person of doing. If you care, I think that’s hilarious.

Your understanding of what a Red Herring is is a bit flawed, I recommend further reading on the topic. A Red Herring is someting that is irrelevant to the discussion because it introduces or focuses on an aspect that is irrelevant to the subject of the discussion.

So unless you want to claim that marygreenman’s argument in itself was irrelevant to the topic, me adressing and questioning said argument isn’t a Red Herring.

When someone argues based on certain premises, then their oppnonent may question these premises. And that’s what I did.

The premises that I questioned were

a) marygreenman’s claim to be able to speak for queer people in general

and b) her implied assumption that slashers were not queer.

You see, being a part of a group does not give you the right to speak on behalf of said group.

A couple of exampels: I’m German, but that does not mean that I can speak on behalf of all Germans. I’m a woman, but that does not mean that I can speak for all women.

In a hypothetical situation where I am the only German around, then my claim to be an authority on all things German might be valid, to a degree. But the second another German is around, I better make damn sure that they agree with me before I speak of “we.”

So if marygreenman wants to be able to speak of “we” as a representative of the LGBT community and adress slash shippers as “you” with demands, then she better make sure that slash shippers are not also LGBT.

As soon as your argument is based on your claim to be an authority who is able to speak on behalf of a group, you’re walking on very thing ice,  because, newsflash, there’s always someone around who belongs to your group but has a completely different view on things than you do.

And marygreenman, identifying as a lesbian, trying to talk on behalf of the LGBT community when there’s evidence that slash shippers are mostly LGBT people themselves is not even walking on thin ice, but pretty much already sinking to the bottom of the lake.

Okay, two things. you ignored the part where Mary used ‘for a lot of us’ or some shit, when speaking about lgbt folk, which implies that she was NOT speaking for every lgbt folk ever to ever exist ever. You also ignored the part where nothing she said was her stating how the lgbt community FEELS about slash shippers. The only part where she used the group was in stating that we are not play things, a lot of us struggle with obtaining basic human rights. That was literally it, and you focusing on literally that is a red herring. It’s also a strawman argument, you’re literally creating this entire problem up on your own. If you have a problem with her stating that folk who fall in that group are not play things, then state that, because that’s all you can argue with, because that’s all she said when she spoke for the group.

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know. When she said YOU she was talking to slash shippers, but you really think she was telling lgbt folk to treat slash pairings with respect when writing them? Common sense would tell you that she’s obviously talking to the straight fans, who don’t have to deal with these very personal issues, who often misrepresent shit in their fics because they’re uninformed half the time, which is why your focusing on that shit is also a red herring, because not only is the focus you’re putting on it irrelevant, the fact that you’re so focused on it with such a rabid defense is your problem, not hers. There is nothing wrong with the way she phrased that, and if it offends you, then you’re probably part of the problem.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid. They’re not fucking invalid, you’re just talking over them like what you have to say is more important than what they do. She is a queer woman, she has more validity when discussing the issues she finds in slash fandom than a straight woman would. Just like I have more right and validity in an argument about abortion than a man would. Just like POC have more validity in racism discussions than a white person would - not that you actually acknowledge their validity, given the arguments you find yourself in within fandom. Just because you say it doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean it actually doesn’t matter.

Okay, let’s go over this again.

Your text makes it sound as if you were convinced that m/m shipper weren’t, to the majority, queer. Is that what you think?

When you include topics and characters of minority groups, your narration has a responsibility to treat them with respect. We’re not your playthings. For many of us, it’s a struggle to be treated like actual human beings with everyday rights.

This makes it sound as if you were claiming the right to speak for a group of people. What group is that, and what gives you the right to speak on behalf of others?

Look here, sugar pie. That was my first reply to her. That’s me asking what she meant. That’s me asking her to clarify. And nothing else.

And if you think that’s a Red Herring, you’re oh so sadly mistaken. Again, I recommend further reading on the topic. *sigh*

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know.

I was asking her for evidene for the implied dichotomy. Evidence she didn’t deliver. And unless she does, the exact composition of “slash shippers” remains a mystery, but to refute her “we” against “you” rhetoric, my evidence is plenty.

It’s a bit like Schrödinger’s cat. Unless we have reliable evidence, for either, “slash shippers” could be mostly heterosexual or queer, we don’t know. But any argument based on the assumption that they are either is questionable at best.

Now, I don’t have to prove that slash shippers are mostly queer to refute her argument based on the dichotomy between LGBT folks and slash shippers. She has to prove that dichotomy exists. And that survey does in fact constitute evidence to the contrary, although, granted, by no means conclusive evidence.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid.

Did I ever say that her personal experience was invalid? Did I ever say that she wasn’t allowed to feel the way she described?

I’d be really astonished if you could point out just one case where I ever said such a thing.

But personal experience is something different entirely than expertise.

And I’ve pointed the same thing out more than once. Most recently here and here.

Being a part of a certain group/minority gives you personal experience. No more, no less. And it becomes really problematic if you start to think that your personal experience is really suited to make general statements about a topic. But I get that that is hard to accept for many people who are used to getting away with that kind of reasoning.

Nothing you just said is relevant, because you just said her rhetoric was pitting slash fans against lgbt community, and that is factually incorrect. So whatever argument you come up with based on that situation is irrelevant. And the fact that you came up with that argument when she failed to clarify her words, which don’t need clarification unless you lack reading comprehension, proves that it wasn’t an innocent question. Your opinion was made up already without that clarification. You went on the defensive and it says all it needs to say about your stance on this topic.

The fact that you continue to call me bullshit words like sugar pie also proves your inability to adapt depending on what other people want from you. You can’t do something as simple as refraining from attaching bullshit endearments to people who ask you not to, so I don’t understand why you continue to believe you have the intelligence to argue shit that actually effects living people, not a goddamn shipping community.

Why shouldn’t I call you sugar pie when you call me “bitch”? But I know that you see no fault in that, so it’s useless to talk to you about that, sweetling. Oh, your reading this absolutely right: it’s an affront to you personally, and one you’ve given me plenty of reasons to justify. Just read a bit of your own posts. You start getting hostile every time, way before I do (but I get that arguments sometimes seem like hostility to you, since you have none).

And all you do spew is bullshit, the whole day long. I’m pretty impressed by the amount that comes out of your mouth.

See, I can reply with pretty much the same senseless insults as you. It’s so very easy.

But hey, I’m trying to be patient. So, again, from the start, so that one day, you will understand it too.

n her post, marygreenman was addressing sterek fans and slash shippers in general. She then stated her believes, defining a group of “we” (non heteroxexuals) that were, according to her, “wronged” by slash shippers. And that statement only makes sense when based on the implication that slash shippers are a different thing than “we”.

And so, yes, I asked for clarification. Because as opposed to you, I don’t like making up strawman arguments if I can avoid it. And the fact that I am biased toward people like you or marygreenman isn’t a secret at all. That does not invalidate the arguments, sorry, baby bun.

I never once called you bitch at all during any of these arguments.

A lie.

My insults are blunt. Your insults are roundabout bullshit, just like your arguments. you don’t call me a bitch, even if you think it. Instead you use fake endearments, just like your fake arguments.

Which of these arguments are false? You have yet to disprove one of my arguments. Or adress one, really.

But I went out of my way to refrain from calling you dude or bro, even though it takes me actual effort since I actually call everyone that, in every argument. I refrained from calling you it because you asked me not to.

And I didn’t call you honey, as you asked me to.

That’s you in a nutshell. You don’t think you should have to do something just because someone asked you to. She asked slash fandom at large to take the issues that gay people face seriously, even in fic, and you don’t think they should have to. Just because you dress your insults up doesn’t make a single ounce of difference. It makes you a condescending asshole, but it don’t make no difference. Don’t make you argue any better, don’t make you a better person. You can’t see past the hostility in my responses because you think that tone dictates validity in these arguments. Sorry to break it to you, but anger is healthy. Feeling anger toward something is good. It doesn’t make my responses less valid, or less cohesive. You’re trying to be a tone policing asshole, but I’m gonna be hostile every single time I engage you because given your track record, there’s no point in policing my tone. It’ll fall on deaf ears regardless.

So let’s go over it again. In her original post, she stated an issue she sees daily in slash fandom. When she spoke for queer folk, she said we are not your playthings, utilized for your spank banks, when you write that narrative, treat it with care. It’s a simple request, a simple reiteration for slash fandom since slash fandom writes copious amounts of sex involving homosexuals. That’d be the normal fandom to speak to involving these issues since it’s the fandom partaking in these issues. You, loyal to every fault you have involving this fandom, immediately took issue with her wording and her simple problem, implying that she was personally attacking this fandom and talking to the entirety of it. But here’s something you might learn when you get older, when someone speaks about an issue, they’re not talking to the people that don’t got shit to do with the issue. they’re speaking directly to the people partaking in the issue. And the people that take issue with that generality are generally the people causing the issue.

You being bias a hundred percent invalidates your argument, because it’s not an actual argument. You’re arguing with a person and not a request. You’re not attacking the issue she raised, you said fuck all about the actual content in the post, and it’s because you don’t give a shit about the actual content. You give a shit about who said it and what words they used while saying it. Fandom doesn’t have to publish essays for their posts to be relevant, and they don’t need you undermining actual issues being raised by attacking how they phrase things in their anger.

Sorry, I’m speaking on behalf of fandom, and what gives me that right?

Drivel. Ad hominem after ad hominem attack, and you’re now adressing a diifferent topic entirey than the one we talked about last, because you have no way to counter my arguments.

You complain about tone policing, and you are right, hostility does not invalidate arguments, but for something to be valid, there would have to be an argument first. 

You are implying i called you a bitch based on a personal post that isn’t tagged? Okay lol. You should follow me too. Monitor my behavior and then insert that behavior into arguments that have nothing to do with the behavior. It looks like you already got started on that.

I asked you not to call me sweetie too. Let me give you a scenario. You asked me not to call you dude, because it was falsely misgendering you, so I went ahead and stopped calling you bro and man too since they fall within that realm. As you can see, I’ve stopped calling you anything basically. Other than my insults. I asked you not to call me honey because that’s what creepy guys call me when they’re hitting on me, and you didn’t make the leap to stop using like-worded endearments too since they’re basically the same thing? Way to get technical with my requests. Way to afford empathy and compassion to a fellow human. Gold star for you. I suppose it’s because you seriously don’t want to become a social justice blog. Since social justice is basically just code for human decency now.

Ad hominem: short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument

My recount of the original post does not fall within that realm. It directly counters your inaccurate recount of the original post. The rest of that shit is directly in response to you attacking my character, in part based on a personal post that has fuck all to do with any of this, which in and of itself was an ad hominem and as you’d say - drivel. Your entire fucking previous response had fuck all to do with the subject matter, it was a personal attack, and you own up for it, but it doesn’t make it any less irrelevant. My bullshit is in direct response to your bullshit so maybe you should bullshit a little less if you don’t like having bullshit in discussions.

Filed under wank sorry followers

42 notes

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn’t.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

And I should care about what you think, why?

It doesn’t matter what I think, or whether you care about it or not. You’re bullshitting all over this post instead of responding to the actual point of it, which is what you do. How many times have you asked people what gives them the right to speak for a group of people, when they’ve voiced an opinion common in the group they belong to? Coincidentally, it’s generally in a discussions about problematic shit sterek fans do. This is your defense, and it’s bullshit. Unlike you, I kept to the topic of your response. You just relied on red herrings, something that you seem to accuse every other person of doing. If you care, I think that’s hilarious.

Your understanding of what a Red Herring is is a bit flawed, I recommend further reading on the topic. A Red Herring is someting that is irrelevant to the discussion because it introduces or focuses on an aspect that is irrelevant to the subject of the discussion.

So unless you want to claim that marygreenman’s argument in itself was irrelevant to the topic, me adressing and questioning said argument isn’t a Red Herring.

When someone argues based on certain premises, then their oppnonent may question these premises. And that’s what I did.

The premises that I questioned were

a) marygreenman’s claim to be able to speak for queer people in general

and b) her implied assumption that slashers were not queer.

You see, being a part of a group does not give you the right to speak on behalf of said group.

A couple of exampels: I’m German, but that does not mean that I can speak on behalf of all Germans. I’m a woman, but that does not mean that I can speak for all women.

In a hypothetical situation where I am the only German around, then my claim to be an authority on all things German might be valid, to a degree. But the second another German is around, I better make damn sure that they agree with me before I speak of “we.”

So if marygreenman wants to be able to speak of “we” as a representative of the LGBT community and adress slash shippers as “you” with demands, then she better make sure that slash shippers are not also LGBT.

As soon as your argument is based on your claim to be an authority who is able to speak on behalf of a group, you’re walking on very thing ice,  because, newsflash, there’s always someone around who belongs to your group but has a completely different view on things than you do.

And marygreenman, identifying as a lesbian, trying to talk on behalf of the LGBT community when there’s evidence that slash shippers are mostly LGBT people themselves is not even walking on thin ice, but pretty much already sinking to the bottom of the lake.

Okay, two things. you ignored the part where Mary used ‘for a lot of us’ or some shit, when speaking about lgbt folk, which implies that she was NOT speaking for every lgbt folk ever to ever exist ever. You also ignored the part where nothing she said was her stating how the lgbt community FEELS about slash shippers. The only part where she used the group was in stating that we are not play things, a lot of us struggle with obtaining basic human rights. That was literally it, and you focusing on literally that is a red herring. It’s also a strawman argument, you’re literally creating this entire problem up on your own. If you have a problem with her stating that folk who fall in that group are not play things, then state that, because that’s all you can argue with, because that’s all she said when she spoke for the group.

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know. When she said YOU she was talking to slash shippers, but you really think she was telling lgbt folk to treat slash pairings with respect when writing them? Common sense would tell you that she’s obviously talking to the straight fans, who don’t have to deal with these very personal issues, who often misrepresent shit in their fics because they’re uninformed half the time, which is why your focusing on that shit is also a red herring, because not only is the focus you’re putting on it irrelevant, the fact that you’re so focused on it with such a rabid defense is your problem, not hers. There is nothing wrong with the way she phrased that, and if it offends you, then you’re probably part of the problem.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid. They’re not fucking invalid, you’re just talking over them like what you have to say is more important than what they do. She is a queer woman, she has more validity when discussing the issues she finds in slash fandom than a straight woman would. Just like I have more right and validity in an argument about abortion than a man would. Just like POC have more validity in racism discussions than a white person would - not that you actually acknowledge their validity, given the arguments you find yourself in within fandom. Just because you say it doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean it actually doesn’t matter.

Okay, let’s go over this again.

Your text makes it sound as if you were convinced that m/m shipper weren’t, to the majority, queer. Is that what you think?

When you include topics and characters of minority groups, your narration has a responsibility to treat them with respect. We’re not your playthings. For many of us, it’s a struggle to be treated like actual human beings with everyday rights.

This makes it sound as if you were claiming the right to speak for a group of people. What group is that, and what gives you the right to speak on behalf of others?

Look here, sugar pie. That was my first reply to her. That’s me asking what she meant. That’s me asking her to clarify. And nothing else.

And if you think that’s a Red Herring, you’re oh so sadly mistaken. Again, I recommend further reading on the topic. *sigh*

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know.

I was asking her for evidene for the implied dichotomy. Evidence she didn’t deliver. And unless she does, the exact composition of “slash shippers” remains a mystery, but to refute her “we” against “you” rhetoric, my evidence is plenty.

It’s a bit like Schrödinger’s cat. Unless we have reliable evidence, for either, “slash shippers” could be mostly heterosexual or queer, we don’t know. But any argument based on the assumption that they are either is questionable at best.

Now, I don’t have to prove that slash shippers are mostly queer to refute her argument based on the dichotomy between LGBT folks and slash shippers. She has to prove that dichotomy exists. And that survey does in fact constitute evidence to the contrary, although, granted, by no means conclusive evidence.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid.

Did I ever say that her personal experience was invalid? Did I ever say that she wasn’t allowed to feel the way she described?

I’d be really astonished if you could point out just one case where I ever said such a thing.

But personal experience is something different entirely than expertise.

And I’ve pointed the same thing out more than once. Most recently here and here.

Being a part of a certain group/minority gives you personal experience. No more, no less. And it becomes really problematic if you start to think that your personal experience is really suited to make general statements about a topic. But I get that that is hard to accept for many people who are used to getting away with that kind of reasoning.

Nothing you just said is relevant, because you just said her rhetoric was pitting slash fans against lgbt community, and that is factually incorrect. So whatever argument you come up with based on that situation is irrelevant. And the fact that you came up with that argument when she failed to clarify her words, which don’t need clarification unless you lack reading comprehension, proves that it wasn’t an innocent question. Your opinion was made up already without that clarification. You went on the defensive and it says all it needs to say about your stance on this topic.

The fact that you continue to call me bullshit words like sugar pie also proves your inability to adapt depending on what other people want from you. You can’t do something as simple as refraining from attaching bullshit endearments to people who ask you not to, so I don’t understand why you continue to believe you have the intelligence to argue shit that actually effects living people, not a goddamn shipping community.

Why shouldn’t I call you sugar pie when you call me “bitch”? But I know that you see no fault in that, so it’s useless to talk to you about that, sweetling. Oh, your reading this absolutely right: it’s an affront to you personally, and one you’ve given me plenty of reasons to justify. Just read a bit of your own posts. You start getting hostile every time, way before I do (but I get that arguments sometimes seem like hostility to you, since you have none).

And all you do spew is bullshit, the whole day long. I’m pretty impressed by the amount that comes out of your mouth.

See, I can reply with pretty much the same senseless insults as you. It’s so very easy.

But hey, I’m trying to be patient. So, again, from the start, so that one day, you will understand it too.

n her post, marygreenman was addressing sterek fans and slash shippers in general. She then stated her believes, defining a group of “we” (non heteroxexuals) that were, according to her, “wronged” by slash shippers. And that statement only makes sense when based on the implication that slash shippers are a different thing than “we”.

And so, yes, I asked for clarification. Because as opposed to you, I don’t like making up strawman arguments if I can avoid it. And the fact that I am biased toward people like you or marygreenman isn’t a secret at all. That does not invalidate the arguments, sorry, baby bun.

I never once called you bitch at all during any of these arguments. My insults are blunt. Your insults are roundabout bullshit, just like your arguments. you don’t call me a bitch, even if you think it. Instead you use fake endearments, just like your fake arguments. But I went out of my way to refrain from calling you dude or bro, even though it takes me actual effort since I actually call everyone that, in every argument. I refrained from calling you it because you asked me not to. That’s you in a nutshell. You don’t think you should have to do something just because someone asked you to. She asked slash fandom at large to take the issues that gay people face seriously, even in fic, and you don’t think they should have to. Just because you dress your insults up doesn’t make a single ounce of difference. It makes you a condescending asshole, but it don’t make no difference. Don’t make you argue any better, don’t make you a better person.

You can’t see past the hostility in my responses because you think that tone dictates validity in these arguments. Sorry to break it to you, but anger is healthy. Feeling anger toward something is good. It doesn’t make my responses less valid, or less cohesive. You’re trying to be a tone policing asshole, but I’m gonna be hostile every single time I engage you because given your track record, there’s no point in policing my tone. It’ll fall on deaf ears regardless.

So let’s go over it again. In her original post, she stated an issue she sees daily in slash fandom. When she spoke for queer folk, she said we are not your playthings, utilized for your spank banks, when you write that narrative, treat it with care. It’s a simple request, a simple reiteration for slash fandom since slash fandom writes copious amounts of sex involving homosexuals. That’d be the normal fandom to speak to involving these issues since it’s the fandom partaking in these issues. You, loyal to every fault you have involving this fandom, immediately took issue with her wording and her simple problem, implying that she was personally attacking this fandom and talking to the entirety of it. But here’s something you might learn when you get older, when someone speaks about an issue, they’re not talking to the people that don’t got shit to do with the issue. they’re speaking directly to the people partaking in the issue. And the people that take issue with that generality are generally the people causing the issue.

You being bias a hundred percent invalidates your argument, because it’s not an actual argument. You’re arguing with a person and not a request. You’re not attacking the issue she raised, you said fuck all about the actual content in the post, and it’s because you don’t give a shit about the actual content. You give a shit about who said it and what words they used while saying it. Fandom doesn’t have to publish essays for their posts to be relevant, and they don’t need you undermining actual issues being raised by attacking how they phrase things in their anger.

Sorry, I’m speaking on behalf of fandom, and what gives me that right?

Filed under wank

42 notes

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn’t.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

And I should care about what you think, why?

It doesn’t matter what I think, or whether you care about it or not. You’re bullshitting all over this post instead of responding to the actual point of it, which is what you do. How many times have you asked people what gives them the right to speak for a group of people, when they’ve voiced an opinion common in the group they belong to? Coincidentally, it’s generally in a discussions about problematic shit sterek fans do. This is your defense, and it’s bullshit. Unlike you, I kept to the topic of your response. You just relied on red herrings, something that you seem to accuse every other person of doing. If you care, I think that’s hilarious.

Your understanding of what a Red Herring is is a bit flawed, I recommend further reading on the topic. A Red Herring is someting that is irrelevant to the discussion because it introduces or focuses on an aspect that is irrelevant to the subject of the discussion.

So unless you want to claim that marygreenman’s argument in itself was irrelevant to the topic, me adressing and questioning said argument isn’t a Red Herring.

When someone argues based on certain premises, then their oppnonent may question these premises. And that’s what I did.

The premises that I questioned were

a) marygreenman’s claim to be able to speak for queer people in general

and b) her implied assumption that slashers were not queer.

You see, being a part of a group does not give you the right to speak on behalf of said group.

A couple of exampels: I’m German, but that does not mean that I can speak on behalf of all Germans. I’m a woman, but that does not mean that I can speak for all women.

In a hypothetical situation where I am the only German around, then my claim to be an authority on all things German might be valid, to a degree. But the second another German is around, I better make damn sure that they agree with me before I speak of “we.”

So if marygreenman wants to be able to speak of “we” as a representative of the LGBT community and adress slash shippers as “you” with demands, then she better make sure that slash shippers are not also LGBT.

As soon as your argument is based on your claim to be an authority who is able to speak on behalf of a group, you’re walking on very thing ice,  because, newsflash, there’s always someone around who belongs to your group but has a completely different view on things than you do.

And marygreenman, identifying as a lesbian, trying to talk on behalf of the LGBT community when there’s evidence that slash shippers are mostly LGBT people themselves is not even walking on thin ice, but pretty much already sinking to the bottom of the lake.

Okay, two things. you ignored the part where Mary used ‘for a lot of us’ or some shit, when speaking about lgbt folk, which implies that she was NOT speaking for every lgbt folk ever to ever exist ever. You also ignored the part where nothing she said was her stating how the lgbt community FEELS about slash shippers. The only part where she used the group was in stating that we are not play things, a lot of us struggle with obtaining basic human rights. That was literally it, and you focusing on literally that is a red herring. It’s also a strawman argument, you’re literally creating this entire problem up on your own. If you have a problem with her stating that folk who fall in that group are not play things, then state that, because that’s all you can argue with, because that’s all she said when she spoke for the group.

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know. When she said YOU she was talking to slash shippers, but you really think she was telling lgbt folk to treat slash pairings with respect when writing them? Common sense would tell you that she’s obviously talking to the straight fans, who don’t have to deal with these very personal issues, who often misrepresent shit in their fics because they’re uninformed half the time, which is why your focusing on that shit is also a red herring, because not only is the focus you’re putting on it irrelevant, the fact that you’re so focused on it with such a rabid defense is your problem, not hers. There is nothing wrong with the way she phrased that, and if it offends you, then you’re probably part of the problem.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid. They’re not fucking invalid, you’re just talking over them like what you have to say is more important than what they do. She is a queer woman, she has more validity when discussing the issues she finds in slash fandom than a straight woman would. Just like I have more right and validity in an argument about abortion than a man would. Just like POC have more validity in racism discussions than a white person would - not that you actually acknowledge their validity, given the arguments you find yourself in within fandom. Just because you say it doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean it actually doesn’t matter.

Okay, let’s go over this again.

Your text makes it sound as if you were convinced that m/m shipper weren’t, to the majority, queer. Is that what you think?

When you include topics and characters of minority groups, your narration has a responsibility to treat them with respect. We’re not your playthings. For many of us, it’s a struggle to be treated like actual human beings with everyday rights.

This makes it sound as if you were claiming the right to speak for a group of people. What group is that, and what gives you the right to speak on behalf of others?

Look here, sugar pie. That was my first reply to her. That’s me asking what she meant. That’s me asking her to clarify. And nothing else.

And if you think that’s a Red Herring, you’re oh so sadly mistaken. Again, I recommend further reading on the topic. *sigh*

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know.

I was asking her for evidene for the implied dichotomy. Evidence she didn’t deliver. And unless she does, the exact composition of “slash shippers” remains a mystery, but to refute her “we” against “you” rhetoric, my evidence is plenty.

It’s a bit like Schrödinger’s cat. Unless we have reliable evidence, for either, “slash shippers” could be mostly heterosexual or queer, we don’t know. But any argument based on the assumption that they are either is questionable at best.

Now, I don’t have to prove that slash shippers are mostly queer to refute her argument based on the dichotomy between LGBT folks and slash shippers. She has to prove that dichotomy exists. And that survey does in fact constitute evidence to the contrary, although, granted, by no means conclusive evidence.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid.

Did I ever say that her personal experience was invalid? Did I ever say that she wasn’t allowed to feel the way she described?

I’d be really astonished if you could point out just one case where I ever said such a thing.

But personal experience is something different entirely than expertise.

And I’ve pointed the same thing out more than once. Most recently here and here.

Being a part of a certain group/minority gives you personal experience. No more, no less. And it becomes really problematic if you start to think that your personal experience is really suited to make general statements about a topic. But I get that that is hard to accept for many people who are used to getting away with that kind of reasoning.

Nothing you just said is relevant, because you just said her rhetoric was pitting slash fans against lgbt community, and that is factually incorrect. So whatever argument you come up with based on that situation is irrelevant. And the fact that you came up with that argument when she failed to clarify her words, which don’t need clarification unless you lack reading comprehension, proves that it wasn’t an innocent question. Your opinion was made up already without that clarification. You went on the defensive and it says all it needs to say about your stance on this topic.

The fact that you continue to call me bullshit words like sugar pie also proves your inability to adapt depending on what other people want from you. You can’t do something as simple as refraining from attaching bullshit endearments to people who ask you not to, so I don’t understand why you continue to believe you have the intelligence to argue shit that actually effects living people, not a goddamn shipping community.

Filed under wank

42 notes

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn't.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

And I should care about what you think, why?

It doesn’t matter what I think, or whether you care about it or not. You’re bullshitting all over this post instead of responding to the actual point of it, which is what you do. How many times have you asked people what gives them the right to speak for a group of people, when they’ve voiced an opinion common in the group they belong to? Coincidentally, it’s generally in a discussions about problematic shit sterek fans do. This is your defense, and it’s bullshit. Unlike you, I kept to the topic of your response. You just relied on red herrings, something that you seem to accuse every other person of doing. If you care, I think that’s hilarious.

Your understanding of what a Red Herring is is a bit flawed, I recommend further reading on the topic. A Red Herring is someting that is irrelevant to the discussion because it introduces or focuses on an aspect that is irrelevant to the subject of the discussion.

So unless you want to claim that marygreenman’s argument in itself was irrelevant to the topic, me adressing and questioning said argument isn’t a Red Herring.

When someone argues based on certain premises, then their oppnonent may question these premises. And that’s what I did.

The premises that I questioned were

a) marygreenman’s claim to be able to speak for queer people in general

and b) her implied assumption that slashers were not queer.

You see, being a part of a group does not give you the right to speak on behalf of said group.

A couple of exampels: I’m German, but that does not mean that I can speak on behalf of all Germans. I’m a woman, but that does not mean that I can speak for all women.

In a hypothetical situation where I am the only German around, then my claim to be an authority on all things German might be valid, to a degree. But the second another German is around, I better make damn sure that they agree with me before I speak of “we.”

So if marygreenman wants to be able to speak of “we” as a representative of the LGBT community and adress slash shippers as “you” with demands, then she better make sure that slash shippers are not also LGBT.

As soon as your argument is based on your claim to be an authority who is able to speak on behalf of a group, you’re walking on very thing ice,  because, newsflash, there’s always someone around who belongs to your group but has a completely different view on things than you do.

And marygreenman, identifying as a lesbian, trying to talk on behalf of the LGBT community when there’s evidence that slash shippers are mostly LGBT people themselves is not even walking on thin ice, but pretty much already sinking to the bottom of the lake.

Okay, two things. you ignored the part where Mary used ‘for a lot of us’ or some shit, when speaking about lgbt folk, which implies that she was NOT speaking for every lgbt folk ever to ever exist ever. You also ignored the part where nothing she said was her stating how the lgbt community FEELS about slash shippers. The only part where she used the group was in stating that we are not play things, a lot of us struggle with obtaining basic human rights. That was literally it, and you focusing on literally that is a red herring. It’s also a strawman argument, you’re literally creating this entire problem up on your own. If you have a problem with her stating that folk who fall in that group are not play things, then state that, because that’s all you can argue with, because that’s all she said when she spoke for the group.

And second, your evidence of most slash shippers falling in the lgbt category themselves is still very very flawed, and presumptuous of you to pretend to even know. When she said YOU she was talking to slash shippers, but you really think she was telling lgbt folk to treat slash pairings with respect when writing them? Common sense would tell you that she’s obviously talking to the straight fans, who don’t have to deal with these very personal issues, who often misrepresent shit in their fics because they’re uninformed half the time, which is why your focusing on that shit is also a red herring, because not only is the focus you’re putting on it irrelevant, the fact that you’re so focused on it with such a rabid defense is your problem, not hers. There is nothing wrong with the way she phrased that, and if it offends you, then you’re probably part of the problem.

You talk like people in the minority groups shouldn’t use their experiences and knowledge in arguments like this, like they’re invalid. They’re not fucking invalid, you’re just talking over them like what you have to say is more important than what they do. She is a queer woman, she has more validity when discussing the issues she finds in slash fandom than a straight woman would. Just like I have more right and validity in an argument about abortion than a man would. Just like POC have more validity in racism discussions than a white person would - not that you actually acknowledge their validity, given the arguments you find yourself in within fandom. Just because you say it doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean it actually doesn’t matter.

Filed under wank

42 notes

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn't.

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I don’t need Roz to speak for me, however she does bring up good points. I have chosen to ignore you because your questions are irrelevant and meant to derail the conversation. I’m not interested. Please go bother someone else.

How convenient, right?

It’s of course completely up to you to ignore my questions. As it’s up to me to take that as a sign that you don’t actually know what you’re talking about.

I assume that you don’t have any evidence to support your assumption  that slash shippers are mostly heterosexual.

And that you’re actually just talking for yourself in your post, which is of course your right, thought it’s a wee bit entitled to claim to speak for a whole group of people when you were neither elected nor otherwise autorized to do so.

And it might be of interest to you - though I doubt it - that a fandom survey done in 2013 actually indicates that the majority of slash shippers are actually queer.

Ooops.

So when you say “we”  and mean “queer” people and put them in opposition to “slash shippers”, you are wrong.

And any statement you make that taks the form of “we…” and “you” based on this supposed dichotomy is actually … how should I phrase this? - well, let’s just say, it’s the usual drivel of people who pretend that their own belonging to a minority group gives them some kind of authority to speak on behalf of the group as a whole, but, faced with opposition from within said group, love to employ the “not a true Scotsman” argument.

So for anyone to discuss groups, the group must be entirely united behind one argument? What kind of sense does that even make? If slash fandom as a whole is mostly homosexual then what sense does it make for them to call another queer woman homophobic because of a goddamn ship when there’s a lot bigger problems to contend with? And what sense does it make to use a fandom survey that neither I or Mary took part in to showcase fandom to begin with? If we didn’t take part in it, imagine how many other people in fandom also didn’t take part in it. It taints your evidence because it isn’t all inclusive. Your evidence is bullshit, but nice try, it’s just entirely irrelevant, much like your responses to this post.

Within slash fandoms, there seems to be a misconception that disliking a ship which contains same-sex couples is automatically homophobic. I’ve seen this from both femme and male slash shippers.

Does this misconception not exist? Have you never been called homophobic for disliking a slash ship?

The problem comes when you take this as grounds to turn these characters into objects. You’re no longer exploring sexuality when you resort to this. You’re taking the experiences of non heterosexuals and turning them into masturbation material.

Are you saying this problem also doesn’t exist?

We’re not your playthings. For many of us, it’s a struggle to be treated like actual human beings with everyday rights. So, when you minimize that struggle - when you include it in your fic or art for the sole purpose of illustrating how cute the couple is - your message becomes another way to silence the voices of those that struggle with this situation.

I find it hilarious that this is the part you take issue with, since she isn’t speaking on behalf of a group of people. You’re implying that she is, even when she used the words ‘many of us’. She’s saying you shitting on legitimate struggles for legitimate people by writing it senselessly into your fics is a problem. Just like having Sterek get together during the holocaust, Stiles jewish and Derek a german soldier, would be super fucking problematic because the situation isn’t your entertainment. I’ve seen this fic, I’m not pulling it out of my ass. I’ve seen people use hate crimes toward gay people as a jumping off point for establishing sterek in fic. Super fucking problematic. But okay, her talking for people from her experience is the problem here. It’s a fucking red herring. Your bullshit is the usual drivel of people refusing to acknowledge a problem that is running rampant in fandom. It’s a mob mentality. ‘It doesn’t effect me, so I find it hard to imagine that it effects anyone other than you’. Bullshit.

Filed under wank

42 notes

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn't.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

And I should care about what you think, why?

It doesn’t matter what I think, or whether you care about it or not. You’re bullshitting all over this post instead of responding to the actual point of it, which is what you do. How many times have you asked people what gives them the right to speak for a group of people, when they’ve voiced an opinion common in the group they belong to? Coincidentally, it’s generally in a discussions about problematic shit sterek fans do. This is your defense, and it’s bullshit. Unlike you, I kept to the topic of your response. You just relied on red herrings, something that you seem to accuse every other person of doing. If you care, I think that’s hilarious.

Filed under wank

42 notes

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn't.

uniwolfwerecorn:

imjustateenagewasteland:

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

You think so?

Yes.

Filed under wank

42 notes

Homophobic Behaviors: What it is and Isn't.

uniwolfwerecorn:

uniwolfwerecorn:

marygreenman:

a fandom guide by a lesbian shipper (comments & additions welcome).

After glancing at my inbox and getting the fifth accusation of being a homophobe (today alone), it’s become very clear to me that a discussion needs to be had about what, exactly…

I was asking her a couple of questions. Does she need you to answer them for her?

I’m not answering the questions you asked her. Your questions are irrelevant to the actual topic of the post, and you’re the first to point out when someone strays off topic in a public forum. Your questions, while harmless and ignorant, are meant to undermine her stance by telling her that she shouldn’t speak on behalf of a group that she belongs to. This is how people invalidate actual issues other people experience, specifically issues certain people refuse to acknowledge as existing. By suggesting that this one voice is singular in that complaint and therefore shouldn’t use a group to back their gripes.

But the group has fuck all to do with the post. Her use of the term ‘we’ has fuck all to do with the topic. You’re detracting from the topic, because you don’t think the topic isn’t important. Don’t act like your questions were innocent in origin. They weren’t.

Filed under wank

8,191 notes

Anonymous asked: Why do you hate the john green thing? Just curious.

whitegirlsaintshit:

because fuck john green

  • he’s creepy as fuck. he does this weird thing where he fetishizes nerdy girls and shit. and it’s very fucking creepy to characterize young women when you’re, like, 40. and misogynistic. all the girls in the books are supposed to be these cutesy ass bookworm bitches that are lowkey sexy and probably wanna do shit like ride dick to a white-washed blues song. i’m not with it. and there’s nothing wrong with that, but when you look down on other women, or female-identifying people, you’re a piece of shit.
  • all of his characters are pretentious as fuck. what fucking teenager with cancer takes a cigarette out and walks around with it in between his lips without smoking it? like, if you’re going to go through this whole spiel about metaphors and shit, you can cancel that, because you literally just paid for… nevermind. nawl. fuck it.
  • all his books seem like a damn (500) days of summer, perks of being a wallflower, twilight ass mashup. anyone can predict what the fuck is going to happen by looking at the damn cover. some whiny ass white boy living in a boring world finds a white girl with the Emma Watson haircut reading a book or some shit and she has something unique about her (i don’t know, something that’s wild ableist and insensitive to write in a book, say, cancer), and he falls in love with her, instantly puttin her on a pedestal. they listen to the smiths and scoff at people who play Migos, call themselves misanthropes, run through the city and eat deli sandwiches in the park, then kiss in an alleyway. somewhere in the book, green will trash the girl (maybe she moves, or she dies, or something), and then the boy moves on with wispy eyes and a hard stare with a cigarette tucked behind his ear that he never lights.
  • he’s one of those pseudo-intellectual assholes that thinks that people with a certain kind of smarts are better than those who are seen as conventionally smart (conventionally smart meaning the “white” kind of smart: perfectly enunciated words, coiled up, reading a book while pushing a pair of glasses up their nose, and containing a lot of angst about the world around them because everyone is “devolving into an idiot”)
  • plus, he’s just a ugly nerdass and i don’t care for him or any of his damn work to be on my dashboard. go read something better. fuck that christmas lights in your bedroom ass nigga.

Filed under anti john green yes