Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[PogiJones]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/us-new-mexico-will-be-the-first-state-to-make-child-care-free.1293189/

Yay to mass-warehousing kids with strangers the second they leave the womb. Should help indoctrinate them better too.

Holy shit, you are against child care too?

Jesus fucking Christ.

This is actually a debatable issue, despite your response. It's no secret that families were far more stable in the past (fewer single parent homes, less divorce, more kids), and the big talking point nowadays is "wow, our parents had it so easy, look how easily they could buy a house", and that was usually on single parent income, with more kids. So the question is, why? What changed? "Things are more expensive now." But why? Looking at the societal level, when half of adults were working with more kids, things were better than now when almost all adults are working with fewer kids and better tech. A lot of people would argue that it's the breakdown of the family that is the cause of all this, not the other way around. To make it less abstract, there's an argument that many kids with a stay at home parent is a huge investment boon for the future. Sure, you have half the workers now, but you make 6 kids, you go from one worker to three workers within a generation, and since strong families take care of each other, that single parent worker now has a bunch of productive kids that can make sure they're okay into the future. Then they each make a bunch of new workers each. Meanwhile in South Korea, their society is about to collapse in the next few decades because nobody had kids, because their society promoted an "everyone should work" culture.

So what incentive does free childcare create? Well, you could argue that it eases the burden of having kids, and so it promotes having more kids. A reasonable argument. But as Gameboy mentioned, South Korea has this and it hasn't worked at all, in the slightest. So what are the other incentives it creates? Let's see where we missed something. A mom can stay at home and raise a bunch of kids on one income, or she can go to work at no extra cost to make extra money. In other words, when you have to pay for childcare, a lot of your money you would otherwise make has to go to childcare. So instead of bringing home X amount from a workday, you'd bring home half that. So why bother? May as well just stay home.

To put the argument more succinctly, the program disincentivizes stay at home parents, thus weakening the nuclear family structure further that worked much better in the past than whatever this is now that we have going.

To be clear, I'm not even sure I agree with this argument completely. I think there are other factors that have changed as well. And now that we're in the situation that we are already in, it might help boost birthrates slightly (Although again, not nearly enough in South Korea). But you acting like you're shocked anyone could oppose a policy like this suggests that you really have not given it much thought as to what all the effects can be, because it sounds good on the tin.

[Rendle]

Imagine getting pregnant and growing a baby inside you, women are crazy.

[Nintex]

The craziest thing is that childless men with no chance of buying a house now pay more than ever to feed single moms and their offspring through welfare because of the insane inflation.

We're getting to a point where the majority that works 9-5 will not have kids and thus will see no point in paying for someone elses or healthcare and education for that matter.

[Rendle]

You should have a few kids and abandon them so you can at least get your money's worth.

[Jansen]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/kamala-harris-says-biden%E2%80%99s-decision-to-run-again-was-%E2%80%9Crecklessness%E2%80%9D.1293567/

[Ethan]

We have subsidized childcare here (not free, but cheap) and studies after studies have shown that it's a net benefit for everyone. The cost of that program is quite low in the grand scheme of things. And there's nothing stopping someone from becoming a trad-wife (or non-trad-husband) if they really want to.

The alternative to force a parent to stay home because of absurd childcare costs is not more stable families, it's not having children. And I'd rather subsidize single moms by paying for their childcare so they can work than paying for their welfare.

[kaleidoscopium]

Well shit, that's a load more actors on the HP train...
https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/audible-harry-potter-keira-knightley-kit-harington-james-mcavoy-simon-pegg-1236512046/
Matt Berry completes the IT Crowd terf set I believe. But there's enough names here that I'm genuinely wondering if there is any big name actor left to be promoted as a tervert.

It's only been 10 days since the last TV casting announcement, but this is the audiobooks so I'm expecting the 4 weeks between announcements to hold on the show.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/j-k-rowling-and-her-legacy-of-hate-the-uk-gender-critical-movement.643740/page-150#post-144945399


Need to ban discussion of ALL 200 actors on the site and ALL works associated with them. This is a genocide!!

[PogiJones]

We have subsidized childcare here (not free, but cheap) and studies after studies have shown that it's a net benefit for everyone. The cost of that program is quite low in the grand scheme of things. And there's nothing stopping someone from becoming a trad-wife (or non-trad-husband) if they really want to.

The alternative to force a parent to stay home because of absurd childcare costs is not more stable families, it's not having children. And I'd rather subsidize single moms by paying for their childcare so they can work than paying for their welfare.

You say that it's a net benefit, and yet as childcare becomes more and more prominent, reproductivity and family stability has dropped precipitously. Where are these supposed society wide benefits? And "they can still do it if they want to" is a very naive reading of what a societal incentive is and does. Of course they're free to. But societal pressures affect society, believe it or not.

[Ethan]

We have subsidized childcare here (not free, but cheap) and studies after studies have shown that it's a net benefit for everyone. The cost of that program is quite low in the grand scheme of things. And there's nothing stopping someone from becoming a trad-wife (or non-trad-husband) if they really want to.

The alternative to force a parent to stay home because of absurd childcare costs is not more stable families, it's not having children. And I'd rather subsidize single moms by paying for their childcare so they can work than paying for their welfare.

You say that it's a net benefit, and yet as childcare becomes more and more prominent, reproductivity and family stability has dropped precipitously. Where are these supposed society wide benefits? And "they can still do it if they want to" is a very naive reading of what a societal incentive is and does. Of course they're free to. But societal pressures affect society, believe it or not.

For one thing, women of reproductive age make up a huge proportion of nurses and school teachers, professions for which there's already a shortage. Removing thousands of them from the workforce while they take 5 years off or more would be quite catastrophic. And I don't know, GDP, pay equity, less welfare, etc. Like I said, studies made here have shown that it had a positive impact since it was put in place 30 years ago.

I'm not from the US so I can't speak of the reproductivity (down in the entire world as people get richer and have access to contraception) or family stability (many causes; might as well blame people not having God in their heart; a "stable" family could be one in which the woman has to STFU and can't divorce...).

[Jansen]

tervert? kys pls

[Jansen]

[TylenolJones]

What’s their Resetera username?

[HardcoreRetro]

I'm loving the comments on it. Looks like a good video.

[Jansen]

 

[Polident]

Well shit, that's a load more actors on the HP train...
https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/audible-harry-potter-keira-knightley-kit-harington-james-mcavoy-simon-pegg-1236512046/
Matt Berry completes the IT Crowd terf set I believe. But there's enough names here that I'm genuinely wondering if there is any big name actor left to be promoted as a tervert.

It's only been 10 days since the last TV casting announcement, but this is the audiobooks so I'm expecting the 4 weeks between announcements to hold on the show.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/j-k-rowling-and-her-legacy-of-hate-the-uk-gender-critical-movement.643740/page-150#post-144945399


Need to ban discussion of ALL 200 actors on the site and ALL works associated with them. This is a genocide!!

They’re genuinely mentally ill and this sweeping “we’re under attack by actors reading one of the most popular children’s book series.” only fuels the cult delusions leading to self harm or harming others.

[nachobro]

nintendies

[Uncle]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/us-new-mexico-will-be-the-first-state-to-make-child-care-free.1293189/

Yay to mass-warehousing kids with strangers the second they leave the womb. Should help indoctrinate them better too.

Holy shit, you are against child care too?

Jesus fucking Christ.

doesn't this just further normalize the idea that both parents should be working at all times?

like you identify a problem: oh no, now it takes two income streams to support a small family rather than one, but historically you need a parent at home to raise the kids

so rather than fix the job/housing/income problem, you just make it easier to keep both parents working full time, entrenching that attitude as normal, the path of least resistance

[Uncle]

pogi 

[Uncle]

[i mg]https://i.imgur.com/5dE2oxo.png[/img]
[i mg]https://i.imgur.com/hF3myEP.png[/img]
 

bro says "merry-o" 

[Boredfrom]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/us-new-mexico-will-be-the-first-state-to-make-child-care-free.1293189/

Yay to mass-warehousing kids with strangers the second they leave the womb. Should help indoctrinate them better too.

Holy shit, you are against child care too?

Jesus fucking Christ.

doesn't this just further normalize the idea that both parents should be working at all times?

like you identify a problem: oh no, now it takes two income streams to support a small family rather than one, but historically you need a parent at home to raise the kids

so rather than fix the job/housing/income problem, you just make it easier to keep both parents working full time, entrenching that attitude as normal, the path of least resistance

So fuck both the parents and the kids while trying to find a solution on decades old problem? 

It also should be noted that one of Garfield’s main problems was “indoctrination” at early age.

[DavidCroquet]

Well shit, that's a load more actors on the HP train...
https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/audible-harry-potter-keira-knightley-kit-harington-james-mcavoy-simon-pegg-1236512046/
Matt Berry completes the IT Crowd terf set I believe. But there's enough names here that I'm genuinely wondering if there is any big name actor left to be promoted as a tervert.

It's only been 10 days since the last TV casting announcement, but this is the audiobooks so I'm expecting the 4 weeks between announcements to hold on the show.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/j-k-rowling-and-her-legacy-of-hate-the-uk-gender-critical-movement.643740/page-150#post-144945399


Need to ban discussion of ALL 200 actors on the site and ALL works associated with them. This is a genocide!!

They’re genuinely mentally ill and this sweeping “we’re under attack by actors reading one of the most popular children’s book series.” only fuels the cult delusions leading to self harm or harming others.

Final Fantasy 7 catching random strays for...some reason? Is this how people talk about an extremely real and actually happening human rights crisis when they are sincerely invested and concerned? (the answer is no)

I hope/expect it to be like Final Fantasy VII Remake: people have their dose of nostalgia satisfied with an extremely successful first season, a second part with a notable decline and after the third, free fall.

Also why is the JK Fanclub thread even open still? It serves literally zero purpose besides endrunning the "no HP talk" rule.

[Ethan]

The societal pressure of expecting a healthy adult to work. Am I in the mutual aid Bluesky thread?

[benji]

If we want to change the flag, first we have to kill every white person. Normal, healthy forum!

FACT CHECK: He said the white people who are the actual problem, not every white person.

To be fair… The way things have gone this past month, I don’t think the symbolism of the flag will hold up in a year, or two.

I love your goofy dramatic posts.

“It is honestly pretty telling how the indie VTuber scene is like 45% trans women…”

Dude saying this like is a good thing.

Whole sentence is even better, it's an accusation that "mainstream vtuber" are leading a transphobic conspiracy to silence the near majority of vtubers.

If Instagram and Youtube Shorts are any indication, the algorithm still wants me to watch multi-millionaires like Brad Pitt or Seth Rogen doing press tours for their latest $100 million movie laughing their asses off as they do quirky puff piece interviews talking about how awesome their lives are. Not the movies themselves, but the marketing around them. We all need escapism but maybe we could do with less of the ultra-rich who have zero cares in their lives juxtaposed with Gaza, mass layoffs, impending totalitarianism, Ukraine etc.

Brad Pitt reportedly got paid $30 million for F1.
Like, just do your movie and enjoy your millions in private and fuck off.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/it’s-increasingly-harder-to-not-be-immediately-resentful-of-celebrities-celebrating-their-careers-considering-the-state-of-the-world.1293117/

Man in 2025 who has just discovered press junkets as if they haven't been a major part of marketing movies for nearly a century.

While true, we also do take into account things like time between bans and post count.

So, let's say, for example, that you do some console warring or act like a dick for about 3 months and you get up to a 1 week ban as a result. That's roughly 4 actions against you escalating normally, depending on severity it might be less than 4. If you then stop doing that entirely and are a model poster for the next year but slip up at one point and fall back into your bad habit, depending on how bad the post is, we probably won't escalate on the prior infraction and will just ditto the previous ban duration. So instead of getting a two week ban, as per normal escalation, we'll just give you another one week ban as a reminder not to do that again.

Of course, that assumes you are posting normally. If you just leave the forum for that year instead of posting regularly, we'll just act as if you never took that break because we never saw a change in behavior. The change in behavior being the key that makes this work.

Basically, we do recognize that people change and unless it's a situation where a much older action against you is exactly the same sort of infraction as the post you just made, it might not count toward how we moderate your account. For example, if you only really pop up to be a dick to a poster you don't like and don't really post otherwise, I wouldn't expect us to give you much grace.

We'll also look at post count to a degree, like, for example, if your account has been actioned 11 times. I think everyone can agree that there is probably a difference between someone who has roughly 1,000 posts and 11 actions against them and someone who has 10,000 posts and 11 actions against them. This, of course, ignores severity of infractions. In this example, we're talking about two platform warriors with equivalent infraction histories.

In this way, we'll also consider how quickly infractions get racked up. We can obviously see a difference between someone who has been actioned 11 times in ten years versus someone who has been actioned 11 times in a single year. The one who has racked those infractions up over a decade averages an infraction a year, the yearly tap on the shoulder, whereas the guy who has gotten actioned 11 times in a year is probably running around making life miserable for everyone they encounter.

Like I said, we get that people change. We get that someone might have a bad year. We get that sometimes people get heated and lose their cool at times. We get all that and have tried to build an understanding of that into the system and procedures we use.

Shouldn't the severity be the only thing that really matters? Notice that B-Dubs only hints at it but doesn't indicate these made up formulas do any weighting of the offense. Surely someone who makes a joke and gets banned for three days should matter less, even if it happens 11 times in a year, than a guy who gets banned for racism and transphobia just once.

"We're looking for evidence they've changed" in terms of no longer being a racist or transphobe obviously will never come. The person is just going to not speak on anything resembling this anymore rather than rush into threads to show they now can mouth the proper talking points. As we've, as a group, contended for nearly eight years now, it makes no sense to allow such people to return to the forum. Yet they do it. Then turn around and permaban someone for "being in junior status" for the slightest offense.

Obviously being a junior is the greatest weighting of all, even though the forum opened with a promise that they would no longer do that like GAF did.

it says a lot about the times we live in that virtually every major artist I used to idolize has lost all their mystique.

It doesn't say anything about the times, it says a lot about you.

Have to say I thought Trumps drawing skills were better.

The tits are so small they accuse him of a drawing a minor. I'd never make a mistake like that

I can see that point though, who wouldn’t draw huge knockers?

Well shit, that's a load more actors on the HP train...
https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/audible-harry-potter-keira-knightley-kit-harington-james-mcavoy-simon-pegg-1236512046/
Matt Berry completes the IT Crowd terf set I believe. But there's enough names here that I'm genuinely wondering if there is any big name actor left to be promoted as a tervert.

It's only been 10 days since the last TV casting announcement, but this is the audiobooks so I'm expecting the 4 weeks between announcements to hold on the show.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/j-k-rowling-and-her-legacy-of-hate-the-uk-gender-critical-movement.643740/page-150#post-144945399

A perfect example of why the meaning of terms matters. Joanne is a TERF, but the number of others working on anything Harry Potter are probably in the single digits at most. 95+% of the population associates Harry Potter with... well, Harry Potter, they associate none of it with radical feminism of any kind. This is the same thing they've done with fascist and jewnazi, where the term has nothing to do with the meanings they once held and is merely just an epithet to throw at people they're upset with. All of it designed to label their opponents as the most extreme thing possible while eliminating the extremism from the definition and only relegating themselves to an extreme.

[Propagandhim]

please god not another Uncle/BoredFrom wrangle 

[Boredfrom]

I'm not from the US so I can't speak of the reproductivity (down in the entire world as people get richer and have access to contraception) or family stability (many causes; might as well blame people not having God in their heart; a "stable" family could be one in which the woman has to STFU and can't divorce...).

Also not from the U.S., so is weird to me see people using the argument of “boomer generation was stable” when my family boomers were less than “stable family were a parent stays at home and takes care of the children” and more like “eleven children need to do child labor to help their family to survive, as their parents were very Catholic about reproduction  ”.

[PogiJones]

The societal pressure of expecting a healthy adult to work. Am I in the mutual aid Bluesky thread?

Raising kids IS work, dude. Someone has to raise the kids, and it can either be a caretaker watching 10 different strangers' kids for a paycheck or the parent that loves them and is invested in their future. Who do you think does a better job? Raising kids is a job someone has to do. Best be a parent, if possible. And here's a reminder: for most of human history it was possible on less tech and less money and way more kids, because again, kids are a GOOD investment not only for society but also the family's wellbeing.

[yetanotheraccountholyf]

free childcare? how about we abolish CAPITALISM and let parents spend time with their kid?

bore or era???

[benji]

Parents are bigots so shouldn't be allowed to abuse their kids by "caring for them" or "raising them" anyway, all kids should be property of the state so they can be raised not only in their proper gender but free of chud influences.

[nachobro]

this shit is gonna save me a ton   thanks gov

[nachobro]

now i can spend even more on xbox games, nm gov directly funding israel