only on tumblr would shaming people who get off on childporn, incest, and bestiality be controversial
You guys clearly haven’t visited Reddit. Or any other place online where white males congregate.
This is a personal blog and I talk about/repost whatever I find interesting, diverting, or beautiful. Topics include but aren't limited to: politics, feminism, race/ethnicity, social/economic justice, art, history, literature, cute animals, pop culture, other nonsense. I credit/link back to sources whenever possible. More about this blog
- a man tried to start a debate when it was okay to hit a woman
- other people shut him down
- he later said “well, they talk about this all the time on reddit”
- my theory that anyone who consistently wonders and demands to know when its okay to hit a woman and tries to find a definitive answer is a creep
Your theory is entirely correct. Same goes for men who constantly wonder exactly which sketchy as hell conditions constitute rape. And men who think there’s a meaningful difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia (a term made up by pedos who don’t want to be called pedos). And men who think eugenics is a pretty great idea. These kind of bizarre, immoral, creepy-as-fuck conversations happen constantly on Reddit. Basically, if you’re not a straight, cis, white male, then you’re gonna have a bad time.
Just go to http://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/ to see what’s up (major trigger warning). Reddit is boiling over with white straight cis male rage and entitlement. It’s kind of fascinating to see it all collected in one place.
Its interesting people try to say “Hey these are normal guys with careers and families and dreams and blah blah”, when yeah, that’s actually kinda the point.
Creepshots was mostly populated by normal men. Not by an obese 55 year old that lives with his mother that only wears a tanktop but by normal guys. Not people excluded from society but people that were perfectly integrated into it.
and these perfectly normal men defend rape, misogyny, etc and normalize sexual violence against average women
And these perfectly normal men commit rape, misogyny, and sexual violence against average women. And then thousands of other perfectly normal men celebrate their violence and their misogyny on the internet.
Terrifying men don’t actually “look” terrifying. They’re your classmates, your friends, the polite and bored bank clerk that is doing a charity run on Sunday and hates cheese.
Don’t imagine even for a second that someone having a family, a career, “normal” shit like that to ruin means they deserve others to “go lightly” on them. These men deserve to have their deeds accounted for.
I don’t give a fuck how nice he is to his mum or that he donates to charity. If he attacks women- and taking invasive photos of women and young girls without any consent or knowledge and then putting it on the internet for other perfectly normal men to cream over is an attack on those women and girls’ rights to privacy and respect and fucking bodily autonomy and consent- then he deserves every fucking consequence he gets for his actions.
i’ve just basically concluded there’s no such thing as a “normal” guy that “wouldn’t do stuff like that!”. specific men don’t get to be exempted from the general population of men, they’re not special.
I don’t have a problem with porn in the slightest, as a concept. But what feminists who support porn need to remember is that while we have elaborate theories about fantasy and consent, a lot of men engage with porn because they view it as an ideological statement of men’s right to dominate and control women. There’s a reason that it’s more popular in red states than blue states. A lot of male users—-possibly most!—-see it just as a fantasy to rub one out to, and a lot of women look at porn. But for some men, especially the ones obsessed by it like these Reddit dudes, it’s not really about sexual arousal. They use it to soothe themselves by imagining women are beneath them. That’s why they’re not satisfied with porn where everyone is consenting and paid.
“Doxxing” is the practice of piecing together personal information culled from someone’s publicly available online profiles and comments in order to figure out their real life identity. Many people are careless about maintaining their anonymity and will use the same screennames and email addresses everywhere. That makes it easy to cross-reference details they leave on one website with their Facebook or Twitter accounts and find names, phone numbers and even addresses. Many times, the determined doxxer doesn’t even have to trace your IP address or hack into your accounts. You might inadvertently be leaving traces of your real life identity all over the place.
The intention behind doxxing is generally malicious. It’s to connect people’s online activities to their offline lives and expose them to harassment. Doxxing is also problematic because it’s easy to make a mistake and identify the wrong person.
Doxxing is a particularly big problem for already vulnerable groups, like women and girls, closeted gender/sexual minorities, and people with persecuted religious or political beliefs. Doxxing can get those people stalked, harassed, injured, imprisoned, or even killed. Being able to use your real name online without worrying about negative repercussions is a privilege many people don’t have.
Don’t want to get doxxed?
That said, what Adrian Chen did was journalism. He did not “doxx” Violentacrez—he wrote an article about him and a pretty even-handed one at that. He interviewed the subject and the subjects’ acquaintances. He gathered information from publicly available sources.
The intention was not to intimidate or harass Michael Brutsch, but to inform the public about the shady side of a very popular website. The article also raised important questions about free speech, privacy, anonymity, and personal responsibility online. Chen also attached his name and reputation to the article—another reason why it is journalism, not doxxing.
So describing the Chen piece on Michael Brutsch as “doxxing” (as many seem to be doing) is inaccurate. The term subtly suggests that Chen was setting Brutsch up to be attacked by a mob with pitchforks. Will Brutsch face negative social consequences for his online activities? Probably. Will he be jailed or lynched? Given that he’s a white man living in a country where the rule of law is strong, I strongly doubt it.
Brutsch is not the victim here. He willingly posted disgusting and inflammatory things online for kicks. He’s not entitled to any pity or sympathy. He was a shitty person for years and it’s finally coming back to bite him in the ass. I find it more pathetic than sad that Brutsch is figuring out at the age of 49 that there are limits even to white/straight/male/cis privilege.
You want to know who the real victims are? All those girls whose Facebook pictures he stole and posted on Reddit for pedophiles to download (including this 14-year-old). All those girls and women who were forced to become porn stars without their knowledge or consent. The families of the dead children (r/deadjailbait) whose pictures he posted online to shock and titillate. The minorities (r/n*ggerjailbait, r/Jewmerica), rape victims (r/rapebait), and violence victims (r/chokeabitch) whose pain he exploited for lulz. Michael Brutsch didn’t give a shit about them, so why should we give a shit about him?
Do you know what upvotes are called on Reddit?
Violentacrez apparently had tens of thousands of karma points by the time he deleted his profile. But Michael Brutsch didn’t understand what karma truly is until now.
Reddit.com is a social website that allows its user to share and discuss content such as videos, photos, articles, websites, and so on.
Reddit is massively popular (http://blog.reddit.com/2012/01/2-billion-beyond.html), especially with young people (http://en.reddit.com/r/misc/comments/nevz9/results_of_the_reddit_demographics_survey_in_pie/).
Reddit is split into subcommunities known as “subreddits,” meaning that while reddit exists as a website, it consists of the sum of its subcommunities. People can subscribe to each community and participate by sharing and commenting.
Unfortunately, the reddit community as a whole also harbors and caters to pedophiles, distributors of child pornography, rapists, peeping Toms, and sex offenders.
Last fall, Anderson Cooper aired a report exposing the child pornography hosted on the site, ultimately leading to the largest subreddit devoted to it being shut down. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuMdQRRLoYg&feature=related http://www.reddit.com/r/jailbait
Dozens of subreddits took its place.
Reddit users, as well as people in the media, have criticized Reddit’s permissive attitude towards child exploitation. Unfortunately, while admins didn’t ban sexualized images of children on paper until last February (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/02/policy-shift-reddit-bans-child-pornography.html), the rule remains unenforced, indicating that they are more interested in shielding themselves from bad press than protecting innocent kids.
I think it’s really interesting that I brought the price so close to stealing and made the movie so easy to get and made it so clear that it’s a human offering it that it sparked a debate about pirating.
[T]o steal from someone and not feel bad, you either have to be a sociopath or view the act differently. One way is to remove “Someone” from the equation. You’re not stealing from a person. Big companies do a lot to help people view them as less than human. I heard a speech by Noam Chomsky who said that corporations are like super humans. They cannot be hurt like a human can and they never die. They are not susceptible to scrutiny or accountability. this makes them more profitable. If companies want to enjoy these benefits to some degree they have to live with what else comes with being not human. you miss out on compassion, forgiveness, camaraderie, empathy, trust all kinds of shit.
Generally speaking, people feel much less compunction about stealing from Geffen and CBS than they do from their favorite artists. We want to support the creatives, not the executives.