#anti double standards

[silalcarin]

Why is it that most of these assholes are STILL not being held accountable? Why is that most of these assholes are STILL getting jobs?

Seriously, the only 4 people on this list who were rightfully held accountable and found guilty and who are serving jail time are: Danny Masterson, Harvey Weinstein, Josh Duggar, and Larry Nassar. Everyone else is literally still getting employed, being found not guilty, or, in Bill Cosby's case, getting out of prison after only a few years.

What the flying fuck happened? After the allegations were made and denying statements were given in response, that was it? That was the end of it? It was as if nothing had happened?

Oh, and notice how many other celebrities, dead or alive, are missing from this list:

Mark Schwahn

Masashi Tashiro

Jim Fitzpatrick

Stoney Westmoreland

Todd Grimshaw

Carlos Cruz

Herman Jose

John Barrowman

Cas Anvar

Jeff Smith (the host of The Frugal Gourmet)

Jean-Francois Harrisson

Bryan Callen

Curtis Lepore

Harrison Wright

Dan Spilo

Chris Langham

Paul "Des" Ballard

John Leslie

Ronald William Brown

Kevin Clash

Roman Polanski

Woody Allen

Armie Hammer

William Hurt

Jonathan Majors

Michael Fassbender

John Lasseter

Max Landis

Ansel Elgort

Fred Savage

Shia LaBeouf

Noel Clarke

Nate Parker

Bill Murray

Al Franken

Matt Lauer

Andrew Kreisberg

Michael Weatherly

Stephen Collins

Charlie Sheen

Stuart Hall

Dan Harmon

Frank Langella

James Woods

Dan Schneider

Alexander Payne

Anthony Anderson

Ben Affleck

Timothy Hutton

Sylvester Stallone

Gary Oldman

Louis C.K.

Jerry Lewis

Joss Whedon

Jim Carrey

^ Why don't any of these assholes have detailed entries in this list?

Fuck. That. Bullshit. As a victim of both sexual harassment and sexual assault, this fucking disgusts me.

[the-library-alcove]

One repeated refrain I keep seeing from the Pro-Palestinian crowd, from the most virulently Jew-hating to the most Jew-sympathetic, is pretty straightforward.

"Well, after 75 years of how the Palestinians have been treated, can you blame them for the 7/10 attack?"

And the response that I've been itching to give to that...

"So, you're saying that the Nakba was acceptable back in 1948? Because after 1000+ years of mistreatment by Muslim Arabs, including multiple massacres and ethnic cleansing in living memory, that means that the Jews were justified with the Nakba--indeed, they were restrained, because they could have easily done so much worse, and the Palestinians Arabs hadn't had any mistreatment yet. There was a clear side who had been the victims (the Jews) and a clear side who had been the victimizers for over a thousand years, as the Muslims been the ones doing the mistreatment to the Jews. If you're saying that 75 years of marginalization justifies mass rape and murder, then the Israelis in 1948 would have been justified in killing every single proto-Palestinian Arab by that same metric.

"No? That's different? How? How is it different? Explain to me how it's different without using the word 'colonizer', because a vast number of the Jews who lived there were native and had never been living elsewhere. Sure, they were just a portion of the Jewish population as a whole, but so are the Palestinian militants. Would someone whose family had been butchered in the 1929 Hebron Massacre not be justified in taking out their hate on other Arabs? Because that's the standard you're promoting now. How is it different?

"On what ethical grounds is it okay to say that the Palestinians deserve to get to rape and murder for 75 years of marginalization, and yet that the Jews simply displacing them but allowing them to continue living, sparing their lives after 1200+ years of brutal suppression... that act is somehow the most horrendous and monstrous act in the entire history of mankind, as some Pro-Palestinian activists have explicitly said?"

"Explain to me how 75 years of mistreatment justifies mass murder, but 1000+ years of legally recognized second-class brutal near-slavery doesn't justify displacement of your former oppressors."

[nando161mando]

Liberal double standards

[fem-lit]

Imagine this: penis implants, penis augmentation, foreskin enhancement, testicular silicone injections to correct asymmetry, saline injections with a choice of three sizes, surgery to correct the angle of erection, to lift the scrotum and make it pert. Before and after shots of the augmented penis in Esquire. Risks: Total numbing of the glans. Diminution of sexual feeling. Permanent obliteration of sexual feeling. Glans rigidity, to the consistency of hard plastic. Testicular swelling and hardening, with probable repeat operations, including scar tissue formation that the surgeon must break apart with manual pressure. Implant collapse. Leakage. Unknown long-term consequences. Weeks of recovery necessary during which the penis must not be touched. The above procedures are undergone because they make men sexy to women, or so men are told.

Civilized people will agree that these are mutilations so horrible that a woman should not even be able to think them. I recoiled when I wrote them. You, if a woman, probably flinched when you read them; if you were a man, your revulsion was no doubt almost physical.

But since women are taught to identify more compassionately with the body of a man or a child—or a fetus or a primate or a baby seal—than with our own, we read of similar attacks on our own sexual organs with numbness. Just as women’s sexuality is turned inside out so that we identify more with male pleasure than female, the same goes for our identification with pain. One could protest that breast and penis are not parallel terms, and that is valid: Breast surgery is not exactly a clitoridectomy. It is only half a clitoridectomy.

— Naomi Wolf (1990) The Beauty Myth

[jessmmariano]

One thing I will never understand is how certain people in the Gilmore Girls community will look at a traumatized, abandoned teenager like Jess and practically crucify him for not being a good boyfriend to Rory and then look at a privileged, arrogant, reckless adult like Logan and think it’s okay for him to act that way because he grew up with sad birthday parties…

Same goes for Christopher (not that I’d ever defend him). People hate him with a passion for being irresponsible and careless and arrogant and pretty similar to Logan. But Logan is perfect and can do no wrong in their eyes…

[sometimes-men-need-help-too]

The Dadvocate called it the martyrdom of boy moms.

It's these videos where these mothers are speaking about how they are teaching their sons, usually under eight years old, some sort of basic life lesson anyone should know all for the sole purpose of making life easier for her son's future partner.

Payal Desai has nearly 40 videos on her tiktok/instagram that are like that. Her playlist is titled no dusty sons. Here is an example of a video she's posted:

She's not the only one. The Dadvocate reacted to another woman who made a tiktok where she said she was showing her son to look for things so her daughter doesn't have to use her brain space to know where everything is. And I'm sure there's tons more if you look for them

Now one of my issues is that she's blatantly exploiting her sons. Because of her no dusty sons videos, she has been on TV at least once, has had articles written about her and what she's doing, and has a lot of supportive comments like way to go mama, you're a queen/icon/legend, as a girl mom THANK YOU.

I despise it when parents use their kids like this. This woman is showing her kids' faces to countless strangers online. She has 289.9k followers and her account is public. It's bad enough to post about your child on a platform like facebook without caution, let alone what she's doing. And a lot of people are overlooking it because they think she's promoting a good message so it's 'fine.'

The other problem I have are these "lessons." A good majority of them are things she should be teaching them anyway, not directed at a future partner. She has another video where she's teaching her son to brush his teeth and tongue so his partner doesn't have to deal with a man who didn't learn the basics of dental hygiene. You don't teach them to have a good diet or to brush their teeth because it could be inconvenient for their future partner, you do it because it's good for their health. You do it because future adults need to know that sort of thing.

[lady-of-the-spirit]

I'm never going to not be furious about Lore Olympus having a whole mini arc dedicated to Demeter questioning her parenting and apologizing to Persephone and trying to work through her generational trauma, while Hades neglects Thanatos his entire life, humiliates and bullies him several times as an adult, and the way that is dealt with is one chapter of Hades saying "my dad sucked so I didn't even try to be a parent" and not even apologizing, while Thanatos has to apologize to Hades and tells him "you weren't as bad as you could have been, i made things difficult for you as a kid and at least you were there" and that's it.

[justanisabelakinnie]

"We need more strong, fleshed out, well-developed female characters of color!" you bitches couldn't even handle the Madrigal women.

[troythecatfish]

[blackswaneuroparedux]

ἐχθρὸς γάρ μοι κεῖνος ὁμῶς ᾿Αΐδαο πύλῃσιν ὅς χ’ ἕτερον μὲν κεύθῃ ἐνὶ φρεσίν, ἄλλο δὲ εἴπῃ*

- Homer, Illiad

I hate like the gates of hell whoever says one thing but hides another in his thoughts.*

Ho-hum. It’s that time of year again...

Remember the Occupy Wall Street movement? For a while corporations were genuinely threatened by angry disenfranchised youth. But corporations are run by smart people. In less than a decade they turned their attackers into defenders using this one simple trick.

There are three things I’ve learned since working in the corporate world.  Never ask a woman her age. Never ask a man, his salary. And never ask multinational corporations what their Middle Eastern logo looks like during pride month.

This doesn’t fool anyone least of of all those who are gay or lesbian.

[givingairtomymouth]

If JJ treated a couple of girls the same way Kiara treated John B and Pope, y'all would not be out there shipping them and justifying his s***ty behavior.

[reignof-fyre]

Greens: alicent was maritally raped!!!!!

Also greens: rhaenyra should have done her duty and forced her gay husband to have sex with her even if he didnt like it!!!!!

[the-library-alcove]

If you want to see a prime example, perhaps almost the platonic ideal, of what the problem is with having "not bigoted" be an identity, rather than a descriptor or ideal, look no further than this fun set of posts from @behemocoatyl from yesterday (23/2/24):

(I was blocked within ten minutes of making this response, btw)

And then there was this:

And this:

Well, as I'm blocked, and they've declared that they can't be antisemitic because "they're a good person", I just... want to play with that mindset a bit. Tweak it just a little, to show how that doesn't work. But gently. I don't think I have to go too far to show how self-absolving yourself of bigotry doesn't work...

There we go! Isn't that a helpful illustration of the problem?

I hope they have a wonderful day too!

[icedsodapop]

Not to say Oprah Winfrey doesnt deserve criticism but like, why do I see more vitriol from White leftists at Oprah owning property in Hawaii than at Quentin Trashtino contributing to the displacement of Palestinians by literally moving to Israel with his new wife? Where's the energy??

[thesunfyre4446]

"alicent and criston are hypocrites !!"

lol yeah no shit sherlock. antis pointing out alicole's most obvious character flaws that have already been established in s1 thinking it's a "gotcha" moment.

yeah they're hypocrites. we know. and it's ok to dislike them for their hypocrisy.

but saying that alicole "deserves" b&c? like it's some kind of justified punishment for having sex? do you guys understand it's exactly the same thing as saying "rhaenyra deserved to get usurped because she had sex with harwin"

stop being weird.

[somewhereincairparavel]

[TW: grooming] Gentle reminder that Luke castellan was a 19 year old adult going after a 14 year old Silena, emotionally manipulating her and basically grooming her into giving him information. (Luke was said to have recruited Silena sometime after he left chb, which is basically the ending of TLT and Silena was 14 in TLT while Luke was 19) and continued to do so for 4 YEARS (the time between TLT and TLO is 4 years, and Silena only stopped falling into the trap after Charlie died, which was in TLO)

I hope the pjo timeline is an eye opener for the naive as fuck fans defending and justifying Luke's behaviour and having the audacity to deny that Silena was indeed groomed.

There's a difference between appreciating well written complex characters vs actually glossing and meat riding their problematic and questionable behaviour. A huge fucking difference. I think Luke is a good written character, but seeing the amount of fans justifying him being a creep scares me.

"Grooming" (I took the definition straight out of the internet for the detectives that will probably scrutinize and chew on my post lmao) is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.

Luke took advantage of Silena to BOTH manipulate AND exploit her for information.

Don't even get me started on the "he had a terrible home life, he was traumatized as a kid, what else can you expect?" yeah he was, but how was that Silena's fault? She shouldn't have to be taken advantage of , suffer without even realizing it, and pay the price to Luke's insanity, just because Luke had internalized issues like other demigods did?? How is that a fucking excuse??

Look me in the eye and tell me that Luke was "so hot because of how crazy, messed up and unhinged he is"

I dare you.