#it's not even a protest thing

[dinosaurcharcuterie]

I am pretty sure I'm not trans. Like, I check every few months, usually around the time a doctor gets weird about my genes. I do, however, also regularly consider removing the gender marker from my ID, even though it would seriously limit my ability to travel unhindered.

I am a woman. I like being a woman. Most of the times in my life I thought I hated my gender were related to fashion, but it turns out sewing machines can be laughably cheap and no one can force you to wear dusty pink to your cousin's wedding once you make your own money.

I just detest that a little letter on a little chip on a little card carries so many exhausting expectations. And changing it to "the" other one would only replace those expectations with the same thing in a slightly different color.

So once or twice a month, I play with the idea of just erasing it and making where I fit in statistics and what room I should pick a cubicle in to change into swimwear in and what random ass word should precede my name someone else's problem. Let the people who care figure it out, because I'm quite honestly exhausted with it all.

It would almost be worth the pain of getting all my ID updated. Almost.

[brainrotcharacters]

Mothers and fuckers of the ketchup and mustard household (I'm going even more insane than usual)

[boimgfrog]

People are so scared of polyamory but it's normal as hell. Like it should not be this complex of a topic 4 people. Literally ur just dating more than one person. Or more than two people are dating each other. It's not some crazy concept like oh my god it's just a different way of dating

[bixels]

The idea that uni protesters are "elitist ivy-league rich kids larping as revolutionaries" on Twitter and Reddit and even here is so fucking funny to me if you actually know anything about the student bodies at these unis. Take it from someone who's going to one of the biggest private unis in the US, 80% of the peers I know are either from the suburbs or an apartment somewhere in America, children of immigrants, or here on a student visa. I've heard about one-percenter students, but I've never met one in person. Like, don't get me wrong, the institution as a whole is still very privileged and white. I've talked with friends and classmates about feeling weird or dissonant being here and coming from such a different background. But in my art program, I see BIPOC, disabled, queer, lower-income students and faculty trying to deconstruct and tear that down and make space every day. So to take a cursory glance at a crowd of student protesters in coalitions that are led by BIPOC & 1st/2nd-gen immigrant students and HQ'd in ethnic housings and student organizations and say, "ah. children of the elite." Get real.

[plistommy]

[hedgehog-moss]

(TW POLICE VIOLENCE)

France has been feeling like a police state this week, there were 5000 cops deployed in Paris yesterday (watch this video and tell me this is a normal amount of cops and they're behaving normally) and they keep acting like they have total immunity*, to beat up protesters, to arrest protesters, or just random people walking in the vicinity of a protest. My 70+-year-old dad tried to go to a peaceful protest and had to abandon the idea because of all the tear gas being used by police.

*Which they do—as Le Monde pointed out, the cops who are violent risk nothing because they can't be identified because almost none of them wear their identification number even though it's supposed to be mandatory. They're not being penalised for not wearing them, so why should they?

If you can stomach it, please have a look at the photos and videos on this Twitter account documenting French police brutality against protesters—as I write this, the most recent tweet is about a journalist who was beaten up by a BRAV-M cop* using his steel baton; he had his head cracked open and his hand broken.

(* BRAV-M is a motorised repression corps—cops on bikes—a unit that was dissolved in 1986 after some of them beat a student to death, who wasn't even attending a protest but walking near one. Macron changed the unit's name, from Voltigeurs to BRAV-M, and reestablished it to suppress the Yellow Vests protests. This week, a BRAV-M cop deliberately drove over a 19-year-old's leg at a protest after chasing him on his bike. The victim said he heard a cop say to others "Smash him." Another BRAV-M punched a protester unconscious on March 20. And today Le Monde published an article about BRAV-M cops being recorded bragging about "breaking elbows and faces.")

In Paris last week the CRS arrested a 14-year-old kid because they took him for a dangerous black bloc protester I guess?? A child spent a night in police custody without knowing why. They've also arrested several 15 / 16 year-olds. Let's teach the youth what happens when you exercise your right to protest!

On March 16th in Paris, within one evening, they arrested 292 people, and 283 were released without charges, which means they're mass-arresting people for peaceful protests as a strategy of intimidation. The student I mentioned in my post the other day, who spent 48 hours in custody and was eventually charged for refusing to have his DNA samples taken and filed, asked the cops why they were arresting him + 4 other people who were walking down the same street and they said "Because you look like fucking leftists."

The government tells us "We fully support our brave police forces" when the cops are arresting people for "looking like leftists." How are we still a democracy? The guy also mentioned that during the time he spent at the police station, the police was mostly arresting Maghrebis, though they made an exception for him, a Black guy. There are videos from the past week of cops beating up women, tear gassing protesters in the face from 20cm away, kicking protesters in the face when they're already on the ground, crushing their heads under their boot, brutalising a homeless man and old ladies, tear gassing crowds with young children in them. I'm having trouble finding links to these specific incidents I remember because there are so many videos circulating.

Look at this video, they're violently striking the back of people's heads with steel batons even when the protesters are already going in the direction they're told to. The little old lady shoved around and trying to protect her head from the strikes is breaking my heart.

Surely at the point when enforcers of state authority are arresting middle schoolers, beating up citizens for exercising their rights and gassing and pepper spraying elderly people, children and babies in strollers, the government might want to make some sort of statement condemning this state of affairs, but instead they have been telling us they're proud of & grateful for their police forces, which of course angers people and makes protests more violent. The Minister of the Interior, who supervises the police, praises them wholeheartedly and excuses all instances of deliberate brutality as 'isolated incidents' due to 'tiredness'.

Here's a thread in English describing a protester's experience—"Yesterday (March 23) the level of arbitrary police violence clearly leveled up. I was tear gassed three times without being able to move in a very dense crowd; policemen took advantage that people were unable to move more than 20cm to pounce on us and bludgeon us in a totally arbitrary manner." (you can see an example of this behaviour in this video from a different protest)

Yesterday, after a day of nationwide protests that brought a fresh new wave of video evidence of cops beating up protesters and making reckless use of tear gas—at the end of a day when a special ed teacher at a protest got her thumb torn off by a tear gas grenade—this is what the French Prime Minister said:

They're not even trying to play it off like "both sides made mistakes" they're telling us they condone everything the police is doing, that this is what they're deploying them for:

(screencap from this video)

(this is from this video, in which you can hear a woman screaming "Stop it! You're strangling him! You have no right! I'm filming you!" The cops don't seem to care about being filmed. They're beating up citizens with the government's full blessing after all.)

Macron's government is trying to intimidate people into giving up their right to protest, by deploying cops in huge numbers and publicly voicing complete support for their behaviour, by allowing them to beat and arrest hundreds of people and to use tear gas indiscriminately. Tear gas has been completely normalised as a means of state violence, it's very practical that it doesn't leave traces of blood or broken bones I guess, but it's still violence, it burns, it's a chemical whose effects on people's health we don't know a lot about.

^ Paris (from this vid; caption: "one tear gas grenade after the other")

Macron condescendingly told us there's no "magic money" which is why the pension reform is needed, but he did find the money to stockpile these apparently unlimited amounts of tear gas grenades to suppress protests against his reform to make poor people work longer.

^ Nantes (screencap from a vid in which the cops throw three or four grenades at once and you can hear people say "oh come on, seriously? this is crazy. Why? go fuck yourselves" in a tired tone)

We've also found out yesterday that three Corsican MPs were pressured not to support the Assembly's no-confidence vote against the government—by being told if they didn't vote it, a teaching hospital would be built in Corsica.

The island of Corsica is the only region of France that doesn't have a teaching hospital; due to lack of medical resources Corsicans often have to travel to mainland France for healthcare. Just last month the Minister of Health said sorry, still no teaching hospital for Corsica, it's just not possible right now. Then last week some "magic money" was apparently found to build it but only if the Corsican MPs didn't support the no-confidence vote. I know this kind of thing isn't exactly unique in politics but Macron has been slashing hospital budgets to the point that 20% of French hospital beds are closed due to lack of staff, and he used the health of 340,000 French citizens as a bribe to save his ass. The three Corsican MPs ended up voting in favour of the no-confidence vote despite of that, as it was what their constituents wanted (honour to them). Macron's government survived the no-confidence vote by only 9 votes.

Whatever legitimacy Macron has as a President right now is being clung to by MP corruption and police repression. How do we move forwards knowing that, I don't know. How does he have legitimacy to govern on any issues after the way he handled this reform and the following protests? His police forces are drowning city centres in tear gas, a chemical whose effect on birds and other fauna is not known, and we're supposed to listen to him talk about the environment? They're wasting thousands of litres of water using water cannons to disperse protesters, and we're supposed to listen to him talk about low groundwater levels and how we need to save water? I was going to say, what about his legitimacy abroad but other Western governments don't seem too bothered so far by his handling of the protests—though I'm grateful that Amnesty International did condemn it, and that a Belgian deputy made a speech in Parliament this week asking his government to condemn Macron's use of violent police repression.

[Wait, I just saw that as I was writing this post, the Council of Europe condemned the "excessive use of force" in France. Saying that 'sporadic acts of violence' of some protesters can't 'justify the excessive use of force by agents of the State' or 'deprive peaceful protesters of their right to freedom of assembly'. This is the opposite framing as the one our government is standing by—sporadic acts of violence by cops that are either justified or excusable—it's refreshing.]

Between that and Charles III cancelling his visit (and lots of tourists cancelling trips to Paris which is bound to piss off the tourism industry) and our own media waking up and starting to talk about the government's brutality, I hope Macron starts being held accountable. He has been fanning the flames of this crisis at every turn, by telling us that the crowds protesting in the street have 'no legitimacy', by sending cops to break strikes even though striking is a Constitutional right (but the only part of the Constitution he cares about is the one that starts with 49.3), by condemning the protesters when asked to condemn police violence—saying "When [protesters] use violence, unregulated, absolute, we're no longer in a Republic." I agree, but he's describing himself.

When you resort to using article 49.3 to bypass the National Assembly for the 11th time this term to impose a reform that 70% of the country is against (and 93% of working people) that will force the poorer classes of the population to work longer, and your only response to people's distress at being told to work until they die is to force them to accept it by allowing your police forces to beat up protesters, to arrest them and to gas them, you have failed as a democratic leader.

The next organised protest and strike is next Tuesday (if you want to give something to the strike solidarity fund, here it is); in the meantime spontaneous protests are still erupting pretty much every day and cops are getting burnt out (good! There are fun videos from yesterday's protests of cops accidentally tear gassing one another, or a police car accidentally running into another as people laugh and clap.) And yes some protesters are getting more extreme and destructive, but Macron is the one choosing to stand by his reform at all costs and let this country burn. And when I look at what we're being expected to tolerate and to normalise, I'm kind of proud that French people's gut reaction was "burn it all."

Some popular Twitter hashtags for the protests:

#ToutCramer - Burn everything #CensurePopulaire - People's no-confidence vote #MacronDémission - Macron resign #OnLâcheRien - We won't cede an inch.

[shortnotsweet]

“Perhaps it was something that hit me, perhaps it was something I ate. But out of the blue, I dreamed I met you, and you said to me, "Hi, ya Gate!" Millions have heard you play Chopin, the critics applaud and approve. But millions more would simply adore to hear you get in the groove!”

— Judy Garland & José Iturbi, “The Joint is Really Jumpin’ in Carnegie Hall”

Dipper makes a deal with a salesman who’s new in town. The salesman has more points than most, and sharper angles than should be possible for a single person, but Dipper knows better by knowing, and sees him for what he is. He’s not a person. He’s a relic of Dipper’s childhood, of nightmares that are frequent but regular. Regular as in normal, not tinted gold and compelling him to scratch his eyelids off when he wakes. It’s the kind of thing that the human mind dreams up on its own as a defense mechanism against some horrible trauma. They’re a product of Dipper’s own mind, and no one else’s, and that is a comfort, in a way. Bill Cipher is not back from the dead because he was never dead to begin with, but he’s come back all the same. It’s not an issue of what, or even who, but rather: how much can Bill Cipher do for Dipper? When the fate of Gravity Falls once again hangs in the balance—that, and the sanctity of the entire dimension—shaking a few hands is the least of Dipper’s burdens. Anything to ease the way.

Bill & Dipper in the same universe

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

“Poorly-Drawn” Poorly-Drawn-MDZS by my friend who has no context for what MDZS is, but has read every comic of mine in support.

[singingcicadas]

idw Ratchet is someone who follows orders and respects authority. He might follow his conscience in spur-of-the-moment decisions that allows him the leeway/initiative to act on his own (e.g. setting up clinic on Dead End, breaking cover to save Verity and Hunter, going to look for Drift, voting against Rodimus in mtmte) but he's never openly defied the orders of an acting leader. Regardless if he doesn't agree with said order and thinks it's stupid. Or wrong.

Even when Ratchet thinks Rodimus' treatment of Drift is unfair, he never speaks up against Rodimus during the actual issue of the exile verdict. He only offers Drift silent support by helping him up on the way out, because Rodimus is the captain and you don't argue with the captain. Yes he thinks Rodimus is a crap captain and acts condesending towards him all the time but when it comes to rank and orders there's no ambiguity.

Voting against Rodimus in the crisis act is a legitimate expression of disapproval, made anonymously in private. He doesn't care about Rodimus knowing his vote, but in public it stays anonymous. He does tell Rodimus off about what he did to Drift, but again, he makes sure it's a private one-on-one appointment. He also doesn't make Rodimus formally revoke Drift's exile or sanction his search, he resigns his position as CMO and quietly leaves to look for Drift himself as a personal commitment.

Common stereotype of what Ratchet is not:

Medic ethics and commitment to patients comes first, factions be damned. I don't care if he's a Decepticon, he's my patient.

No he's not actually like that? When Megatron's in custody he's all lets dissect him awwwww why can't we dissect him why does mass murderers still get rights that's so stupid can't I just torture him a little?

Like he spent the whole war patching up Decepticon-inflicted wounds and witnessing Decepticon-inflicted deaths. He's not a saint. He has as much good reason to hate Megatron and his faction as any other Autobot.

In fact he was pretty eager to ask Optimus about what he's going to decide as Megatron's punishment after he heard about Optimus frying Megatron on the voltage harness.

Optimus has his heart on clemency. Ratchet's the one hoping for execution or something equally nasty. Even though their opinions doesn't line up, Ratchet's still 100% supportive of Optimus' decision.

He repairs Megatron only because of Bumblebee's orders, and makes his unwillingness known.

Later in mtmte Ratchet does save Megatron's life of his own volition and repairs him again, but that's after he's lived with Megatron on the same ship for six months (again something that he considers to be a colossally bad idea but is forced to live with because of orders) and got to know him as a person. Not because of bleeding heart syndrome.

Also Ratchet's not just a grouch all the time. He can be blunt but also knows when to be respectful as appropriate to the occasion. He reprimands Wheeljack for being disrespectful to Bumblebee because leaders should be treated like leaders.

The guy's been CMO since Nominus Prime, essentially the highest-ranking of his profession on the planet; you can't get to that type of position and hold it through consecutive leaders for millions of years without considerable interpersonal skills and knowledge of social protocol.

Prowl does have Ratchet on his little blacklist but the stuff on there really just refers to Ratchet saving Verity and Hunter back in Infilitration. I read it as more of a testament to Prowl's pettiness than Ratchet actually being a problem.

[cath-lic]

visiting london briefly and it’s very funny coming from like, my american understanding of protestant churches being very simple and bare-bones, and immediately getting WHAMMIED by westminster abbey

[sandinmybed]

can i be fr for a minute?? sending abuse to people online for holding different views than you is not activism and in fact actively hurts your cause. most people are not extreme in their viewpoints, you can give them a new perspective if you're willing to spend some time explaining shit. if someone is saying something you disagree with and you rush in there to condescend to them and call them disgusting and subhuman and dont even TRY to explain calmly why their views are harmful, they're going to shut you out instantly and double down on their views.

most people are simply genuinely ignorant to the issues they're talking about - they just pick their views up from the news and the world around them and express opinions because that's what every person does. if you run in there and tell them they're scum for it, what then? if someone does that to you, are you going to think "maybe i should do some research" or are you going to think "this person is an asshole, im blocking them." a lot of you think you're activists and then refuse to do any kind of actual WORK to support your cause.

[redhoodie1723]

Yeah let's also cancel Lewis Hamilton for meeting and having conversations with Putin... Yeah... Also maybe Seb too because he was also there???? Yeah... Right...some of you have never had a job where you had to talk positively about someone you didn't like or approved just for the sake of keeping that job.

idk which time ur talking about hamilton and putin meeting up and making friends, as the only time i can find that they've interacted was at the 2015 russian grand prix where putin was giving out the race trophies. hamilton, vettel, and perez were all on the podium for that race. correct me if im wrong and theres another time theyve met, but thats literally all i can find.

now, first of all, there's a big difference between having to interact with a political figure on a race podium, and choosing to interact with them freely out in the paddock, taking pictures with them, and praising them in additional interviews. there's also a big difference between being polite to the current leader of the country you're in that is known for killing/imprisoning people who speak out against him, and actively supporting an ex-leader who has (as far as we know) never actually killed someone for not being supportive.

if you ask me, it would've been unsafe for hamilton or any of the drivers on that podium to speak out against putin at that moment or act impolitely. on the other hand, the biggest trouble norris could get in for not praising trump and taking pictures with him is maybe a talking too back at the mclaren HQ. like, lets be real, it would be ridiculous and insane of mclaren to fire norris after all the time/resources theyve put into his development, especially now that its finally starting to pay off. it would be like shooting themselves in the foot, a move thats generally reserved for ferrari's strategy team or sauber's pit stops.

furthermore, you are simply assuming that norris' job wouldve been at risk in this situation. not once has it been implied that he was threatened or coerced into this situation. its even less likely that that has happened since piastri hasn't made any comments or taken any pictures with trump as far as i can find. for all we know, it could've been norris' idea to do all that. so, not exactly the strongest defense here.

and even if he had been forced into the corner and told to take pictures and play nice, he also took it a step further to compliment trump in other interviews saying it was an "honor" and there's a lot to "respect" about trump. hamilton has never come out saying any of that about putin. in fact, he has come on the record since then condemning putin and his actions. can you tell me where norris has come out condemning trump and his actions? no? that's funny.

[rootless-cosmopolitan]

Being Ukrainian, born in Russia, with family friends in both countries is an insane experience. A literal distillation of convos from the last few months:

Ukrainians: We haven’t had a full night of sleep since February. No running water for months now, and now the electricity goes out. They’re bombing us non-stop. They aim for the houses at night, and the city center and offices and schools during the day, to kill as many civilians as possible. I sent my daughter to relative safety in Kyiv, but I don’t want to leave my mother, who had a stroke due to war-induced stress and is paralyzed. The hospitals wouldn’t take her because they were full of war casualties. She lies in bed and we hope that a missile doesn’t strike our building, because she can’t go to the bomb shelter. I’ll try to call you next time we get electricity.

Russians: Ugh its so expensive to travel to Turkey right now, we decided to take a two week holiday in Sochi instead. It’s not as nice but we have to persevere. Oh, what’s that? The news? I try not too pay too much attention to it when I’m using my VPN to access instagram and twitter, it just makes me soo sad. You know I’m not political. Hopefully this little war-sy is over soon, because I have to redecorate my house and Ikea is still closed.

Westerners whose entire political philosophy is “vibes” and who think cyrillic is a type of salad: yeah, yeah. bombing, missiles, blah BLAH yawn. Frankly the real war crime is being mean to Russians on the internet.

[shalom-iamcominghome]

Honestly, a very healing thing for my relationship with g-d is to do things out of love rather than fear, which might be an unpopular opinion. When I was in the xtian church, the biggest thing was to Fear g-d because He Will send you to hell in a hand basket. He will send you to eternal damnation, a hell where you can look up and see heaven just out of reach (this was a genuine thing I was told. You can imagine why my atheist phase was a phase of rebelling against that, not in a disbelief, per se, of g-d). This also doesn't help because my history of abuse was based on primal fear, which... isn't conducive to fear models of behavior.

I'm sure the relationship I have with g-d might be seen in a negative light because you're supposed to fear g-d, but I can't separate fear of g-d from the genuinely toxic do-things-out-of-fear-of-eternal-damnation thing.

I do everything - pray, go to shul, follow kosher (as best I can) - because I love g-d. I have no fear of Him because I am secure in my relationship with Him now. What I appreciate about judaism is that there is emphasis on love, where that wasn't the expectation in church.

[chirpsythismorning]

Well, it looks like I've been shadowbanned by the Stranger Things subreddit for talking about the strikes.

This might not seem like that big of a deal, but considering the ST subreddit might very well be moderated by Netflix themselves in some capacity, has me pretty pissed off rn.

For some context, Netflix creating the ST sub has already been speculated since the sub's inception. The first season of the show didn't even start filming until November of 2015, however the subreddit for the show was created a month before that, in mid October of 2015.

It's not uncommon for Netflix to create social media accounts across the board for all of their content in order to promote it online, and so it makes sense that in the process of getting filming ready, marketing was going about creating social media accounts on every platform (their other official accounts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram were also created months in advance of filming as well).

Also worth noting that there is a separate sub called Hawkins AV Club, which fans created themselves to talk about the show and other things related to it that they weren't able to on the main sub, most commonly leaks, which are prohibited on the main one (Netflix don't like leaks...).

Recently though, I noticed all the strike related posts were getting removed, with it being flagged as breaking rule three.

Rule three is pretty simple, in that all it really states is that users cannot post stuff unrelated to the show.

As far as I know, the main ST sub has never made an official post about how the strikes qualify as being unrelated to the show, so it's not like this is some widely understood specific point that has been elaborated on that fans have to follow. To me, it looks like this rule operates as a loophole for a moderator to remove strike posts and list it as 'breaking rule three', without having to acknowledge how fucked up that is.

And so I wanted to test this theory and decided to post the picture of Finn picketing at Paramount Studios in support of SAG-AFTRA the other day.

Right after posting, I added the comment, 'Also ST sub if you delete this, you're confirming you have a Netflix bias'.

For the first hour, the post remained public and so luckily I was able to get some comments on it from other users in the sub. A majority of the comments just acknowledged the picture of Finn and voiced their support, though there was at least one condescending comment speaking negatively against the writers and actors striking. But most importantly, I got a few comments from fans asking why I was insinuating that the post would get deleted aka my time to shine.

I replied by saying that I noticed all the strike related posts were being removed for 'breaking rule three' and how it was bogus because plenty of other unserious posts, that are even less related to the show, stay up all the time. And so, considering the speculation over the years that Netflix played a part in creating the sub and therefore likely still has a stake in moderating it in some capacity, means they are essentially blocking fans from discussing the strike.

I then went into how ST has one of the biggest fandoms for a TV series and how the sub reflects that with over 1 million users. There are plenty of other fandoms out there that are much more niche and small in comparison to ST's base, that have been able to come together and make a big difference by donating and spreading the word as a community, and how it's kind of embarrassing considering our size, that we have not been able to come together to show support for our writers and actors in a tangible way.

And that's when I speculated how I didn't think it was a coincidence that one of the biggest fandoms in the world isn't able to even merely talk about the strikes, in the one place that affords them the ability to come together in the masses, to potentially have the ability to play role in putting pressure on the studios in order to reach a fair deal sooner than later.

These strikes literally depend on the writers and actors not talking about their content in order to put pressure on the studios, and this sub basically operates in the exact opposite way. It allows free for all discussions about the show, but doesn't allow any discussions of the strikes.

Who benefits from that? Netflix. The studios.

The reality is the strikes have EVERYTHING to do with the show. Making posts about an actor protesting so that the writers and actors of said show can continue production in a way that is more just and humane, is about the show. Technically, in a reality where things are never resolved as a result of this strike and the studios being greedy, the show could literally cease to continue. So again, this strike has EVERYTHING to do with the show.

I then ended my comment by saying that despite my suspicions, I hoped that I was wrong and that my post would stay up.

Returning to the sub the following day, I found that my post was not only removed, but also all of my comments were. Everyone else's comments remained including the anti-strike one, and there was also the addition of a pinned moderator comment explaining why the post was removed ie Rule 3.

Now, I have had some of my posts removed on Reddit in the past. Byler posts for example tend to get removed pretty swiftly because the comments get nasty and so that's the moderators usual excuse for removing those, however they don't say it outright with a moderator comment, you usually have to message them directly to get the gist of why it was removed. I've also posted memes before with them being removed and being flagged as breaking rule three, however I have never seen an actual moderator pin the details of the rule. They usually just tag Rule 3 at the top, with it being implied that you have to go look into their FAQ to read up on the rules yourself.

The way they removed my post just came off soooooooooo corporate to me, where the moderator(s) didn't even acknowledge what I said, but basically just proved my point by taking advantage of their rule loophole, by listing off the irrelevant argument against it based on said rule, with no further elaboration on what I actually speculated.

Initially, I wanted to make a post about what happened on here, but I sort of just shined it on because I already assumed they were going to remove it, and so all they did was confirm my suspicions.

But then today I was on the sub and tried to comment on a recent post, only to see that when I tried to reread it after posting, my comment wasn't showing up.

To test if it was a me problem, I went to another subreddit I'm in, Shrek (naturally), and commented on a post. Low and behold it showed up and stayed there...

I then went back to the ST sub to comment on a different recent post and again it did not show up right after I posted it.

So apparently I am a threat to the ST sub to the point where they do not want me commenting on posts anymore, specifically after I posted about the strike and the subs intense measures to prevent it from being discussed at all. Like... ya'll just literally proved my point tenfold.

Now, I do think there very well could be several moderators that are not associated with Netflix at all that are in charge of moderating the main sub. That's actually very likely. However, whether Netflix was involved from the beginning or not, it's also very likely they are now, as the sub is MASSIVE and they probably don't want an account on that scale to be controlled entirely by fans. That would mean 1 million people having access to leaks or anything and everything. Not being able to moderate that would be a pain in the ass (and we're seeing how now in the case of a strike, they also benefit from preventing certain posts from being seen).

So I think that either Netflix created the account themselves from the beginning and have recruited a handful of regular hardcore fans over the years to help moderate it, or they hopped on after a bunch of complications with leaks getting posted to hundreds of thousands of fans during s2-3, taking control at some point from the original moderator, only to join the mix of other moderators that already existed and are basically none the wiser.

In the case of either of those, they can play off that they are an unofficial ST reddit, all because they have a few fan moderators, when it's clear that is not the case.

Anyways, the ST sub has a Netflix (studio) bias and everything that's posted on there is likely moderated by someone that works for Netflix. So, keep that in mind.

[curiosity-killed]

a while back I had lunch with a couple of coworkers, one of whom asked me why I like public transit and public libraries—in a genuinely, sincerely interested fashion. it was not the first time I've been asked—or had people express bemusement about this—and so, despite being caught totally off-guard the first time, I did actually have an answer this time, which was I try to support things I want to see in the world.

and i felt (and feel) like this is extremely obvious. if we all assume that someone else is going to make sure the things we care about exist and exist well, so that we don't have to do anything—chances are good they're not going to get the support they need and they, in fact, won't exist or improve. So, the counter to that is to take the steps you can to provide that support. (duh)

but I feel like there is this mindset (that is heavily class [and likely race and gender] influenced) of like....someone else will take care of it. And it's about public transit or libraries and independent bookstores and it's about voting and advocacy and community. All these important things that require maintenance and perpetual engagement—the same way that you can't just wash your dishes once in your life and never have to do them again (unless you switch to disposal dishes, but then you still have to take out the trash).

I get that there are a lot of reasons why people feel disenfranchised and fatigued but...at the end of the day, life is composed of an endless series of actions that influence what options are available to you in the future. whether it's voting or going to the library instead of amazon or taking the bus instead of an uber....like. yeah you're gonna have to keep doing it if you want to have an impact. there's no silver bullet that's going to magically land us in utopia with only perfect choices, so you're just going to have to keep choosing the best option you've got to get you that next step closer.

if there isn't a bus that takes you from doorstep to doorstep, you still take the bus that gets you closest. if the dishes are dirty, you wash them. if you want the benefits of society, you show up.