Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 1)

[benji]

regardless of the rest of the conversation, excel suggesting the Disney -> Poptart pipeline is anything other than cynical capitalism(!) at its most flagrant is one of the funniest thing in the threads.

Yes, the child muppets harvested by Disney just naturally (and publicly, via highly visible public personae) follow a predictable and traceable course dating back to Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake. It's just kids growing up and experimenting!

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Should I remind everyone that excel is a big wrestling fan?

[DavidCroquet]

honestly your time would be better served letting us know which prominents don't follow wrestling...

[Jansen]

Moderator demoismasque proposed to Administrator AliceAmber at Disney because of course:

Which one is the guy

[Taco Bell Tower]

Anyway, Jeff:

I'm not really seeing it in this thread, but some of the responses on social media, as if they're shocked that she would do a cover like this, are very funny.

Like, did y'all not listen to some of the lyrics on the last album?

Like your favorite Nazi server Twitter?  

[Orange Juice Box]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/black-myth-wukong-for-xbox-series-launches-august-20.1208967/page-7#post-141023853

 User banned (1 month): Extremely inflammatory comparison

im sorry did you say nukes?

Yes. Exclusives in this case are like nukes in this hypothetical. The world would be a better place if they all fucked off into the sun. But so long as someone else has the capacity to make them, you need them too, otherwise you are at the mercy of the person with them.

Classic prisoner's dillemma (although Nukes in the non hypothetical leads to MAD which is why they thankfully haven't been used).

https://www.resetera.com/threads/black-myth-wukong-for-xbox-series-launches-august-20.1208967/page-12#post-141050988

 User banned (permanent): Sinophobia. Racism.

I have no dog in this fight because it could go either way based on everything we know but this is a really weird take lol.

Do you have a particular reason to discount that consultant

I don't know who he is, but - from the description in the pasted images - looks unrelated to the project and his source of authority seems to be living in China.

BRB, banning all the politicians making inflammatory comparisons and saying Nuclear Option

https://www.resetera.com/threads/natethehate-resident-evil-9-will-be-revealed-this-week.1206189/page-5#post-141024615

 User banned (2 weeks): Antagonizing another member

WHO THE FUCK EVEN IS THIS PERSON
why do we hear literally all the biggest news from some random jackass

This ban too?     Not knowing who NateTheHate is bannable?

[HeavenIsAPlaceOnEarth]

She’s doing the Fat4All push up.

I didn't click the link and I don't appreciate any references to it.

[benji]

Things are starting to get precarious:

Spoiler: wow look at the power of that conditioner! (click to show)(click to hide)

In which Shreds comes out as a Nazi (shares a pro-genocide dinner table with Jeff):

[Jansen]

God damn at the very least cut that fucking hair off you can be the white Jada pinkett Smith

[almostheathen]

That hairline needs donations more than she does.

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

wow the sex pest returns to bluesky to sit among the nazis there? What a grift.

[simiansmarts]

[DavidCroquet]

That hairline needs donations more than she does.

almost nothing...with that avatar change, you are as godless as any that have ever walked this earth.

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/the-democrats-male-voter-problem.1215837/page-6

Oh bullshit

Patriarchy is fundamentally crucial element of feminism

You might as well suggest feminists fucked up by not calling themselves humanists

This is some All Lives Matter nonsense

Why is it that women have to walk this line to not alienate men

But men can say or do whatever they want, alienate as many women as they wish.

Incels? Fundamentally presented as the manifestation and victimization of/by the tragic loneliness of men/boys, and it's up to us to save them

This is fundamentally the core problem with this conversation everytime it comes up

It inevitably comes back to holding women responsible

Men don't need to change each other

Women need to change their behaviors, their language, to change men

It always comes back to women's movements are responsible for fixing men, that women need to fight for men but men shouldn't be expected to fight for women because that expectation is alienating. One for all and all for men.

And now I'm sure you'll respond to this by saying I'm proving your point or whatever the fuck as that is the usual way.

I love Jeff, Jeff's my favorite Nazi, but oh my god I had not read incelsiorlef's posts in the Sabrina Carpenter thread and yes the above quote is relevant:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/sabrina-carpenter-announces-7th-album-mans-best-friend-out-august-29-new-single-manchild-out-now.1215972

i know she's not. what i'm saying is the photo could be clearer about it and it's not.

Clearer about what, you literally have to assume like everything to think it's not an image expressing a consensual act.

If you know the album us not a yay sex slavery or yay sexual abuse album then you know the cover of said isn't an expression of sex slavery or abuse!

i think i was clear about that in my first post. regardless this just feels like pointless argumentation now so i'll leave this for now.

No this is a very pointful conversation because your rhetoric is fundamentally dangerous

You have suggested that a narrative image is depicting sexual assault/slavery because it lacks some undefined magic context that would make it clearly consensual

But there's no context to read it as non consensual because it's an album cover for a pop artist with the pop artist participating in the image, an artist with zero history of supporting sex slavery in her personal life or her art... which I remind you, you have conceded you are aware of these facts!

Ergo that's your context.

Your first post is not clear because you fundamentally make no argument except that you can't ascertain if the narrative of the image is consensual... because...

You are free to dislike this art, but to raise a moral panic that suggests it's actually depicting sexual assault/rape/sex slavery is fucking dangerous narrative to proliferate about a young woman

It's outrageous

That is stunning wow. Why is she getting so much hate online with this album and cover?

Misogyny from 1 direction, prudery from another, and whatever you want to name thinking the album cover represents sex slavery from a third

Lots of people have mentioned why the cover actually makes them uncomfortable. They've pointed out how the cover reminds them of Terry Richardson, why they doubt that it's satire or don't think it's successful if it is, why it's not about an aversion to sex. None of this matters to some of you despite pretending to address the critiques raised at this cover.

I suppose all the comments about people being prude or worse covers existing or moral panic are to make people feel bad, but it's hard to feel bad about critiquing the cover when so many of you are proudly wilfully obtuse, if not straight up just lecturing women on a version of feminism that should cater to you and has no concern or respect for how women might feel about issues that target them.

Terry Richardson doesn't own the copyright on this kind of image.

Nor did he event it.

I'm so glad women who are concerned about the reaction to the album cover are getting erased so that now it's suddenly only men think the aggressive reaction to this cover is concerning

Bsky has a ton of women expressing these exact concerns I am but hey!

Also fundamentally

These images are very little different from Betty Page bdsm work, the only different is the exact one floated earlier that it would be fine if she was submitting to a woman (Betty Page's submission photos are to other women)

Anywho it's still not an image of sex slavery

Like y'all need to understand there's only one person in charge of Sabrina's image and that's Sabrina

You think after a life of Disney controlled imaging she's giving that power away now... fucking please

And yet somehow this hasn't prevented people from seeing similarities to his take on this style of photograph and why they have an issue with being reminded of him specifically.

I can't fucking help that and neither can Sabrina

You are entitled to say I don't like this image but there's a clear moralizing against her that's just deeply unacceptable

That means people have the right to raise criticisms with the album if they see fit. If it doesn't bother you it doesn't bother you.

Correct you can say I don't like it!

No one fucking cares if you like it

That's not the conversation

If I said hypothetically this is for framing, if hypothetically I said your argument reminds me of my abusive ex (this is not real I do not have one) would it be fair for me to suggest you're argument is abusive in nature, and that you should have been more careful and that I hold you responsible?

Absolutely not because it's not and in this hypothetical that association is not your fault or problem and thus it is fundamentally unfair for me to make that criticism.

This conversation is far beyond dislike

Power to her.

More often than not I personally think it's tacky and vintage porn star isn't what I vibe with. I can accent that's a me thing though.
(Give me Chappell Roan, her drag queen lesbian aesthetic is way more fresh and still quite sexual).

You have to understand there's absolutely an undercurrent here that isn't I don't like this but thaf Sabrina is being irresponsible and damaging, outright there's been suggestions she hasn't made it clear enough that she isn't representing sex slavery, invocations of Terry Richardson to be used far beyond it reminds me of this so I don't like it.

You might not be prudish or moral panicking but others are here, far, wherever they are.

So what I see is fundamentally happening here is that women and their sexuality has been played up and taken advantage for SOOOO long that it is difficult to separate what's meant for men and marketing and what's a genuine expression of female sexuality and play.

Regardless, I think this a crappy cover example to stan for. The difference is pretty damn clear IMO. Sexuality and imagery can have a lot of nuance. And Halsey's use of it in safeword feels a lot more true and empowering than a girl on her knees getting her hair yoinked.

At the very least it's controversial by design, and people downplaying that people are uncomfortable with it are part of the problem many women face about how their sexuality is this exaggerated thing to be performed and costumed.
Again, this all happens on a level that men barely ever have to engage with.

I'm not telling you to like it

I'm telling you to not assume it's inauthentic and coerced

Also Halsey is queer and Carpenter is not and that is relevant

I'm not telling you to hate it, but you and other are telling the same by saying "don't be offended by it" FOR us. Like sorry, a lot of women go through too much shit to be totally neutral about how we're depicted sexually...often women ARE taken advantage for just that.

Also, elaborate on your last point, it feels like more needs to be said. Frankly, I "trust" a queer depiction of love WAY more than a heternormative one atm.

You literally assumed she's not in control of her own image

I'm also not saying don't be offended... but you can't just declare she's being coerced.

And like that's fine to trust a queer sexuality but like heterosexual women expressing theirs are inherently going to include men

From what I understand, you want me to question harm I could not have intended to inflict on a hypothetical other person. Does the discomfort and harm stop being valid because this hypothetical version of me didn't intend for it? Should I stop disliking a cover and voicing why because of what it reminds me of because Sabrina doesn't know about how I and others perceive it, especially when her reach and mine is so dramatically different?

I don't fucking care if you dislike it! I do care that you're suggesting she's personally responsible for making you think of Terry Richardson and the baggage that entails. Now if all you're saying is this reminds me of that so I don't like it fine, but your verbiage like "taking issue with being reminded of him specifically" suggests something beyond simple I don't like this.

And yes in my hypothetical in no way could you be actually responsible for causing me harm. My hypothetical reaction and feelings would be as valid as any trauma response would be but a projection back towards you or a suggestion that you harmed me wouldn't be.

We are entitled to our feelings we are not always entitled to hold others responsible for them

Now look if it comes out she was intentionally invoking Terry Richardson... new ballgame.

But that's why I specified he's not an innovator, absent other evidence she can't be held responsible for everyone's specific associations.

At current knowledge it's just untenable to suggest that she intended to personally remind you of Terry Richardson or that if she did by accident she's still responsible.

I used a hypothetical abusive scenario because Terry Richardson associations is inherently suggesting an abusive scenario and such insinuations should be made responsibly

Bluntly sometimes in some cases you are absolutely entitled to be offended while simultaneously the artist has no responsibility to avoid offending you

I absolutely believe such is this case given what information we currently have on Sabrina Carpenter

lol if you think optics aren't any part of marketing I dont know what to tell you.
There is no way most parts of a marketing team and photoshoot aren't a very very conscious decision. And a lot of people ain't goin' crazy for this one.

Honestly the core issue here is you're operating from the assumption that Sabrina Carpenter couldn't possibly be in control of her image , some men are and thus running your entire analysis through that lens

And look if years later news breaks out and you're right I'll dm ya and personally concede to you... absent that though it's unfair to assume no agency of Sabrina Carpenter

Well, if you think all of this is my problem, then you can just let me deal with it. We're not a monolith, like I said, so I don't have to make sure you like why I take issue to an album cover or check in with you and your hypothetical, the same way I don't need to accept the hypothetical reasons others have come up with to demean people who don't like this album.

Can't tell you how many times this isn't about like bur broader insinuations against Sabrina Carpenter

You dislike it fine but that's kinda where it reminds me of Terry Richardson analysis needs to end with current knowledge

Also like you say about monoliths not everyone who takes issue is taking issue for the same reason, there has been direct calls for pop stars to be desexualized in this thread which fits into a broader trend towards prudery which has started to call for desexualizing of cinema and etc... dessexualization and drifts to prudery are dangerous and should be addressed

They why are you confused?
I admitted it ain't my taste. And I don't care for knee jerk reactions to me saying it's cringe. 🤨

You quite literally declared that men made her do this!

I didn't. I said a team of marketers.... and a male gaze-fueled world.

Yeah you did

Yeah I think it's always her in control

Sure.

Do you also think no woman has ever been coerced to playing up their sex appeal for camera? C'mon lol. Ill even suggest that one happens way more than the other.

So what I see is fundamentally happening here is that women and their sexuality has been played up and taken advantage for SOOOO long that it is difficult to separate what's meant for men and marketing and what's a genuine expression of female sexuality and play.

lol sure. I like how you admit it's a problem in the industry but DEFINITELY NOT this case

And this isn't including all the posts where you blatantly suggest she might have agency but her fundamentally assumed male marketing team are really why this is happening

By the by

https://www.redlightmanagement.com/artists/sabrina-carpenter/ 2/3s of her management team are women for what it matters

Sabrina Carpenter is far far far closer to if not exactly to Taylor's Swift and Lady Gaga's level of personal authority on her art than more marketing created acts

You clearly place her agency below hypothetical men around her, sorry like you can't fundamentally redefine this conversation at this juncture

The reason I'm steadfast on this is Sabrina Carpenter isn't some mystery she's very very upfront about who she is, what she's interested in and why and what her art is and I think it's kinda fucked up to ignore that.

I've seen a lot of women say it's a tacky-ass cover too. So I guess we're divided! I'm over this since none of your quotes to snap at mine are anything I'd take back.

What conversation do you think we'd be having if all you suggested is the cover is tacky like come on

This is about your fundamental insistence that Sabrina Carpenter has limited to no agency in her art and is being forced or coerced into this... so uh congrats for not taking that back I suppose.

Anyway, Jeff:

I'm not really seeing it in this thread, but some of the responses on social media, as if they're shocked that she would do a cover like this, are very funny.

Like, did y'all not listen to some of the lyrics on the last album?

Like, did you wake up and feel like speaking over women today, Jeff?

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

Spoiler: wow look at the power of that conditioner! (click to show)(click to hide)

There's no fullness in that hair. That picture can't have been done after using conditioner. 

I feel terrible for whoever is letting them stay with them. What a money sponge.

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

based

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wwe-discussion-thread-ot-doomed-by-the-booking.1075830/

OP is now a deleted member? Did someone finally become self aware that supporting a nazi company ISN'T fine? 

[DavidCroquet]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wwe-discussion-thread-ot-doomed-by-the-booking.1075830/

OP is now a deleted member? Did someone finally become self aware that supporting a nazi company ISN'T fine? 

You got me curious who this was. I don't know the answer, but they seemingly went back through ALL of their posts and deleted each one.

EDIT: jk they didn't delete ALL of the posts. It's Wonky Mump.

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

[HaughtyFrank]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wwe-discussion-thread-ot-doomed-by-the-booking.1075830/

OP is now a deleted member? Did someone finally become self aware that supporting a nazi company ISN'T fine? 

You got me curious who this was. I don't know the answer, but they seemingly went back through ALL of their posts and deleted each one.

"Wonky Mump"

One of his deleted posts

I have the PLE/Specials in the main post, but:

January 25: Saturday Night's Main Event (NBC/Peacock Special) - Frost Bank Center, San Antonio
February 1 Royal Rumble - Lucas Oil Stadium, Indianapolis
March 1: Elimination Chamber: Toronto - Rogers Centre, Toronto

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wwe-discussion-thread-ot-doomed-by-the-booking.1075830/#post-133943748

another deleted member lucebuce

[DocWager]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wwe-discussion-thread-ot-doomed-by-the-booking.1075830/

OP is now a deleted member? Did someone finally become self aware that supporting a nazi company ISN'T fine? 

You got me curious who this was. I don't know the answer, but they seemingly went back through ALL of their posts and deleted each one.

He was a frequent poster, and contributor of the wrestling side of the forum. it seems he got tired of the bullshit, and probably didn’t share the same beliefs as the moderators. The good thing about social media these days that you can find your kind through other means. You don’t have to be subjected to being part of a community that got overrun by a lot of the crazy people who were pushed out of the previous forum. if you’ve been to the wrestling site in recent years, all days is a bunch of social media repost, and gimmick posters. The worst kind of gimmick posters.

[simiansmarts]

Spoiler: wow look at the power of that conditioner! (click to show)(click to hide)

There's no fullness in that hair. That picture can't have been done after using conditioner. 

I feel terrible for whoever is letting them stay with them. What a money sponge.

I don’t know what’s worse: that greasy hair or how he’s going wall-eyed trying to make a cool smug expression.

[DavidCroquet]

it seems he got tired of the bullshit, and probably didn’t share the same beliefs as the moderators. The good thing about social media these days that you can find your kind through other means. You don’t have to be subjected to being part of a community that got overrun by a lot of the crazy people who were pushed out of the previous forum. 

[benji]

another deleted member lucebuce

Full time Transbian, part time weeb. I can talk your ear off about Kazuchika Okada or Mass Effect. I love cool art, especially if it's of women! She/Her. (Annie May isn't actually my real name)

"enables you to cry"




Just incredible.

On Era he claimed to live in Pakistan.

And of course:

[DavidCroquet]

Did we catch this ban from the Mindseye OT? 

Wow! Just Wow! From the first 2 hours I've played, this game is VERY cool! The story is intriguing, the gameplay is tight, and the graphics are great, in which I've experienced ZERO glitches or bugs thus far while playing on base PS5. I'd just like to say this is more of a linear type of game than a GTA open world type of game, and I'm perfectly fine with that. People have complained " There's no radio stations, there's no shops, there's no car customization, you can't steal cars, there's no mini games in the open world, you can't do character customization, etc".... Maybe...just maybe the development team didn't want to focus their game around those things, in which they wanted to focus the game around the narrative of the story. From playing the game, having radio stations and character customization doesn't really make sense, as the in game Sci-fi music is good & Diaz has his own outfits as the game progresses.

People... just play this game with a clear mind & don't go into it with negative thinking. People made it seem like this was one of the worse games ever, in which it's not after finally playing it.

Are you mental? Their own marketing made this misleading comparison

User banned (3 days): Antagonistic ableism

I would say I'm surprised darren isn't banned for the obvious shill job, but we are talking about a forum where the General Manager endorsed a scammer who made off with money from real members to the tune of $2000...and that's only accounting for those who admitted to being scammed.

EDIT:
darren clearly having fun social engineering the marks that run the place.

You're calling me "mental" for liking a game I purchased? That's crazy you would say that.

Mods, isn't this word frowned upon here?

[Rendle]

Why is she covering her mosquito bites?

[nachobro]

malds

[nachobro]

that fucking hairline

[benji]

[Hap Shaughnessy]

Did we catch this ban from the Mindseye OT?

I skip most 3/5 day and console war/video game bans.

[DocWager]

Things are starting to get precarious:

Spoiler: wow look at the power of that conditioner! (click to show)(click to hide)

In which Shreds comes out as a Nazi (shares a pro-genocide dinner table with Jeff):

His pupils are out wide like his eyebrows.

Also, he’s apparently given up on looking like a woman. Probably off HRT.