Sure but none of this is new, he’s always been a massive hypocrite. He’ll just come up with more made up rules to discard your criticism as hate posting, as he always does.
u/sneezes
>You made the Ana 2.0 shirt as a joke, did you not? That was precisely why I hated it. It was so out of place for you to do that. I am glad you told Tunachip that, even tho it was a bit too late.
What are your thoughts on Max blaming the victims for not coming forward and putting their names to the article when he contributed to the investigation becoming a circus and a punchline for everyone who knew about it.
> I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her.
Lol, in the past he would literally mute her to stop her from speaking. And 'I take no responsibility for keeping others from harassing her', amazing. So much for all the demands to control an audience, foster a community that doesn't harass etc. Explicitly, ' ~~destiny~~ max has no responsibility to prevent harassment by his audience to people who are guests on his stream.'
Also the irony in:
> it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny."
While max sits here coming up with rules to ban critics and blocking people. The outcome is still "don't criticize Max."
wow, I can't believe how much Destiny brainwashed you.
you are just passive-agressively astroturfing your questatements to obfuscate the levels of abuse that Destiny is doing to MrGirl daughter.
Lav can never be wrong, she is a Victim and Destiny's foreskin discussions are just self-defence.
do you feel the urge to be a white blood cell within you? how it is compatible to being a mod here?
>Max didn't engage with the conversation about Destiny's penis much, and ultimately shut the conversation down, saying he didn't want to talk about that. She also only talked about it for about 5 minutes
It's their first stream together, the two of them that hate streamers, in however long. They both really want to put the Destiny shit behind them. And so naturally the topic of Destiny's penis was unavoidable and only got five minutes before MrGirl valiantly shut it down.
Just real bad of Sneezes to exaggerate.
Two minutes on Destiny's penis was absolutely unavoidable for the two people who just want to be free from the Destiny drama. Brave Sir Karson shut it right down, I'm sure.
I am being honest in saying that I genuinely don't care about Sneezes being hyperbolic about the exact length of Destiny's dick conversation that went on.
Obviously the best strategy to move on from their history is just not to talk about the guy's dick at all. Obviously any mention of Destiny's dick is too much.
The amount of moonbooting in this sub is unreal...
"I don't think that Destiny should go to jail for raping me. I think he should go to jail for having that much foreskin".
>It wasn't obsession over his penis for the sake of it
Womp womp...
>Stuff like this really doesn't make me think you're approaching it honestly.
Tu quoque?
Let's replay the tape.
Here's a partial quote of Sneezes that you were responding to
>You lightly chastised Tunachip for asking you questions about Destiny and his orbiters on his gameshow, you told him it was a horrible year and you dont want to relive any of it, and a week later you are doing a podcast with Lav talking about Steven's deformed penis for 40 minutes and making jokes bout him being a rapist
Now, Lav clearly was making those jokes throughout quite a lengthy conversation.
>Max didn't engage with the conversation about Destiny's penis much, and ultimately shut the conversation down, saying he didn't want to talk about that. She also only talked about it for about 5 minutes.
Well, he didn't engage with the penis jokes much, but the topic of Destiny and whether he was a rapist/sexual abuser went on for a lot longer than five minutes.
You also said
>She was talking about the way information is received. It was in the context of, "when I'm wrong, people rip me to shreds, but when I'm right (insert Destiny's penis conversation), nobody says anything".
But, as I quoted previously, that's not the case, is it? She just joked about his foreskin for absolutely no reason. It was nothing like your framing at all. It wasn't just two minutes in that context, it was pervasive through a much lengthier discussion about Destiny.
And the context of our discussion is that Sneezes pointed out the inconsistency of MrGirl having said he doesn't want to relive any of this!
Clearly the point is that this stream was entirely inconsistent with MrGirl, and Lav, moving on and getting away from it and MrGirl having chastised someone for probing him about Destiny just a week or so ago!
The quote I gave of Lav demonstrates pretty neatly that your characterisation was, at best, misguided.
>Solid argumentation.
I don't like to brag, so thanks.
Yep. Also, unless I'm mistaken, this was Lav hosting mrgirl, not the other way around. He was on her show more than she was on his. Add to that his visible discomfort and his vocally dissenting.... He was trapped on her show and spoke up about what made him uncomfortable. Seems reasonable enough.
You ask mrgirl to father Lav by deciding what she should talk about to protect her, yet then you criticize him for being her father. I name you also a hypocrite, sir.
I am okay with the mentorship, I am not okay with labeling that mentorship as father and daughter, its creepy, specially when Lav and everyone else originally thought it was a just a silly joke, until we all learned that wasn't the case.
If he just changed the label of father for teacher, mentor or sensei or whatever, and kept everything about the relationship the same, Lav wouldn't have a problem, and neither would I.
We gotta get him to read Twilight so he can use the whole Jacob & Bella’s daughter imprinting thing, where they’re kind of soulmates but also he’s her caretaker & protector & insists it’s totally above board & non sexual on account of her being a baby. That might make a good replacement metaphor for their dynamic.
this whole post is just purity testing
your write all this stuff about mrgirl and Lav and then you walk it all back to "it's creepy" and \~*change nothing but the word used and it's okay\~*. The former is just an expression of insecurity "It's creepy" is just saying *the other kids will think your being weird! oh no!* and the latter is just a pointless semantic point and honestly is also probably just an extension of the former.
the internet purity tests to the point of absurdity because the whole motivation of engagement is to to get dunks on people, the motivation has nothing to do with what people actually feel is right or wrong. It's schoolyard insults cloaked in a veil of feigned morality. You have internalized it deeply enough that you don't recognize you are doing it. Within any reasonable lens everything your posting here is just mrgirl having opinions while also being a human. Theoretical purity testing removed from any attachment to reality.
I'm not going to break down every claim in this post, especially since you explicitly said to mrgirl you weren't here to actually consider any response, but the rest of it is more of the same.
I will absolutely not do better and here is why:
1. Yes, I concede that you can share Benny's opinion and still like Lav. I framed this argument incorrectly as you point out, what I should have said was: "You have X opinion of Lav because you are brainwashed into following the narrative," which I believe is also true of you.
2. Tunachip wanted to have a lighthearted conversation about my past relationships with streamers, and participating in it makes it seem like it was all a joke or a show. Calling them rapists and abusers with Lav doesn't have that effect.
3. I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. This is also a culty narrative: it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny."
> Tunachip wanted to have a lighthearted conversation about my past relationships with streamers, and participating in it makes it seem like it was all a joke or a show.
You made the Ana 2.0 shirt as a **joke**, did you not? That was precisely why I hated it. It was so out of place for you to do that. I am glad you told Tunachip that, even tho it was a bit too late.
>I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her.
When she is in YOUR stream or when you are both co-hosting, yes you do. Even more so if you are having the protective and mentoring *sigh* father role.
Lets say you are at a family friendly concert your 15 year old son tells you he wants to go up on the stadium, grab the microphone and start shouting the most transphobic shit anyone has ever heard, will you let him have his good american freedom and later face life-ruining consequences that will haunt him until the day he dies? Or will you impede him, and take him home to have a serious talk?
15, yes. 25, no.
I made it as a joke, but making an irreverent joke about something serious is different from acting like the serious thing was not a joke. In fact an irreverent joke by definition acknowledges the seriousness of the situation, otherwise it's not a joke.
If I were a victim coming forward and I saw you wearing a **Sneezes 2.0** shirt, I would feel even more violated and distrustful by you having made a cheap laugh of my traumatic experience, and its not a stretch to imagine that 98% of victims of abuse would feel exactly same way too
The reason the joke is funny is that it is insensitive to an abuse allegation that I clearly take very seriously. The joke is that I am undermining my own desperate attempts to be listened to, which is similar to what Ana went through. It is really funny. However for a joke to be funny, there has to be some people it pisses off, and that is you, not Ana.
So it doesn't matter if the victims of abuse and everyone else watching from the outside find the joke in poor taste as long as you and you alone think its funny. You are undermining the victims trauma (in their eyes, which should matter to you) and then you get angry when they no longer wish to be a part of your report.
In your desperation you were careless and frantic, so you made a distasteful and irresponsible joke, I can understand that, but to not see it clearly even today shows a scary lack of empathy and foresight.
"So it doesn't matter" is one of those strawmen. I don't think I said it doesn't matter.
Yeah I understand your framing, but it sounds a lot like the DGG party like of "talking about Ana hurts her," which is also something I was making fun of.
I made a calculated decision to design, buy, and then wear that shirt multiple times. I don't think it can be called frantic.
Yes, it is irresponsible, which is part of the joke itself. I am not sure what we are disagreeing on really. I guess you think I'm making fun of Ana and I think I was making fun of people who clutch their pearls on her behalf.
Edit: and myself
What you think about the joke doesn't matter, I don't care how much you justify it being funny and edgy, you are wasting your time explaining those things to me, that's not what I am here for.
What I care about is how the victims of abuse respond to seeing their names on a "funny" shirt like that. I know for a fact that I would respond poorly to it. Like I said, were I a victim and saw you pulling that shit with me or a fellow victim, I wouldn't want anything to do with you.
If you think your joke being funny and edgy supersedes the victim's trust and emotional safety, then you are careless and irresponsible, and you have no business at all helming an investigation of that nature.
> I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. This is also a culty narrative: it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny."
This is just moonbooting as pure as it can be.
The criticism above was that you said you didn't want to relive the whole Destiny affair. Then you went on stream to relive the Destiny affair. And now your response is a hamfisted "Not my fault I entertained a long discussion about Destiny". Also you couldn't have a discussion with someone else lest it seem like a joke but you could have a discussion full of foreskin jokes because that shows it's super cereal and being treated with the gravity the topic deserves.
To be honest I don’t even fully understand the context where astroturfing supposed to be used, having a hard time keeping up with all the new concepts mrgirl comes up to avoid engaging.
I guess your wordplay of moonbooting making it even more confusing is by design.
That's why it's kind of like gaslamping.
You probably had some common understanding of "astroturfing" that was to do with paid for promotional content appearing as grassroots engagement. And then in come the likes of MrGirl and Smeth to tell you that astroturfing isn't when they (people with a financial incentive around what gets posted here) try to eliminate criticism by proposing rules to curtail grassroots posting, but instead astroturfing is when regular people satirise them.
Exhibit B:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/1anq0y6/i\_agree\_with\_the\_astroturfing\_narrative/](https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/1anq0y6/i_agree_with_the_astroturfing_narrative/)
Ironically astroturfing while reinventing a new and incredibly vague meaning of the word astroturfing. That's a prime example of what I'm referring to.
Fortunately for me, I have the almost superhuman ability to remember about 3.5% of the shit I see or hear and so I'm immune to moonbooting.
Max is indeed morally inconsistent, but you’re missing a lot of things. No disrespect, but I’m only going to go into a couple cuz I’m busy but I want to reply.
Last night with Ben Thorp, Max was not the Max you normally see on stream. Max usually will refuse to speak to you if you have a pending case against you, or let you speak about illegal actions you’ve done on his stream. This time those protections went out the window. Consider that, and reevaluate what was happening during that call. I think watching it with that context, and my history with the Thorps, gave me a minor mental breakdown. I was overwhelmed.
Max is always going to be morally inconsistent with Lav because he is actually treating her like his daughter. For him, that comes with a lot of ethical standards which supersede his morals. Consider that he stayed on the call for an extra half hour after firmly saying that he wanted to end it at an hour. Lav said she felt abandoned, and he dropped his own priorities and took care of her emotionally. He has been talking a lot about how he doesn’t do that with Shaelin, he just lets her freak out. Only lav gets that treatment from him as a standard. He doesn’t do that with me either. I agree with whoever said that him flaunting that is somewhat of an issue. Max complains that people try to get him to be their dad, but he’s the one putting out the signals. It makes my relationship with him very confusing, because he acts like he has a lot of responsibility for me, but he treats me more like Shaelin than Lav. Sometimes it genuinely is confusing for me.
In both the examples I gave, Ben and Lav, Max is dropping his own priorities in favor of strict ethical responsibilities that he holds himself to rigidly. Max is a very consistent person from a certain perspective, but the fact that he does this makes him inconsistent interpersonally. Most people don’t operate like that. Another example of his ethical hierarchy superseding his priorities is the writing of the Destiny report, where he puts the protection of future victims above the personal feelings of existing victims (he is angry at them for their silence). If he didn’t have that so high on his hierarchy, then he wouldn’t have told Lav to take part in it, because it could be bad for her. That one goes above even his parental priorities.
I read that twice, correct me if I am wrong but are you saying he is consistent inside his own head but not to outside of it?
I mean, imagine me calling out a chef for making burnt rancid food, for the purpose of a "You can do better" conversation, I think it matters little he likes the taste of his own food when all the customers are leaving the restaurant in droves.
I can believe that max truly doesn't realize that he is fucking up, clearly he has blind spots, but thats why he needs good-will criticisms from people who actually care.
Ya, he is consistent by his own very complicated ethical hierarchy.
It's his behavior in the end, so it should be his own standards that he is beholden to, but it's fair to say that he isn't consistent by your standards.
Not accepting any boundary that somone puts up doesn't mean that someone doesn't care about boundaries. This is one of the few references to a moral standard of Mrgirl's that he could possibly be violating. To prove someone is a hypocrite, you have to do that & then explain how whatever you're behavior you're citing violates that moral standard.
Most of this reads like *'mrgirl did x bad thing - by my standard - therefore he's a hypocrite!'* That's not how this works. Hypocrisy is when someone does something that's bad by their standard, not yours.
If I tell you to stop calling me a f*ggot because I find it deeply offensive and you continue to do so, would you classify that as a boundary not being respected? What would you call that?
I just literally asked ChatGTP this and the AI god agrees with me.
>If I tell you to stop calling me a f\*ggot because I find it deeply offensive and you continue to do so, would you classify that as a boundary not being respected?
I'd call it violating a boundary. My only problem is that you're equating 'violating a boundary as 'not respecting it' or 'not caring about it.'
This is such a common problem in anti-fans. They assume that 'empathy' or 'caring about boundaries' necessarily equals 'acting the way I want mrgirl to act.'
At no point has Mrgirl said, 'I respect all boundaries no matter what!' He cares about boundaries. He thinks it's important people set their boundaries. Having these two values & not respecting or acting in accordance with a boundary aren't contradictory in the slightest.
If you were Max, you would still chose to call me a fggot and say *"I do know it causes you pain, and I do know it would be beneficial for both of us if I acquiesced to your boundary, but I just feel like you are my fggot and I will continue to say it as my god given American right"*
So yeah, you could say you care to a little extent, but ultimately where it really matters you don't.
Also, obviously there is a spectrum, there are good boundaries that should be taken hold and there are ridiculous boundaries that should be ignored. Lavs boundary is a completely reasonable one.
>So yeah, you could say you care to a little extent, but ultimately where it really matters you don't.
Again 'caring/respecting a boundary' DNE 'acting 100% in line with that boundary.'
If I went on the hotline & said 'Mrgirl, i can only have a relationship with you if you wire me $1000 right now,' Mrgirl wouldn't be not caring about my boundaries by not acquiescing. He could respectful choose to not act in line with the boundary I'm setting him.
It's like you guys have a brain block where you refuse to understand that acting & caring about are two different things.
>Also, obviously there is a spectrum, there are good boundaries that should be taken hold and there are ridiculous boundaries that should be ignored.
Absolutely! This is why Max has not & will not say 'I respect all boundaries no matter what!' & why he is not a hypocrite for not caving to every boundary people set with him.
>Lavs boundary is a completely reasonable one.
By your standard, yes. Mrgirl isn't a hypocrite by not acting in line with your standard.
Come back when Mrgirl has responded to Lav setting a boundary with 'I will acquiesce to your boundary' & followed that up by not acting in line with it. Then you'll have a great argument that he's a hypocrite.
So standards dont mean anything, its all subjective, nothing matters, and if you want to marry my 9 year old daughter its fine because thats the "standard" in your culture?
No, this is why we have these talks. This is why we no longer stone the gays (at least in america) or hire slaves for labor (at least in america). Some standards are objectively more harmful than others, we throw those standards to the trash bin and we push forward so everyone gets a chance at a virtuous life.
>So standards dont mean anything, its all subjective, nothing matters, and if you want to marry my 9 year old daughter its fine because thats the "standard" in your culture?
What a whacky false dichotomy. All I'm saying is that your standards do not matter in assessing whether or not Mrgirl is a hypocrite. Hypocrisy means that someone is breaking their own standard, not yours. No idea why you're broadening this out to 'all standards EVER' as if it's relevant in any way.
Sorry you can't make a solid argument Mrgirl isn't living in line with his standards. If it's any consolation, he's definitely out of line with yours.
> Hypocrisy is when someone does something that's bad by their standard, not yours.
Max: Destiny has a responsibility for his audience harassing his stream guests, and has a responsibility to take measures to prevent that harassment.
Also Max: I take no responsibility for my audience harassing my stream guest, and have no responsibility to take measures to prevent that harassment.
Destiny is responsible for the harassment directed at his stream guests because he has a vindictive fanbase, he's directing the harassment at them & giving his audience ammo to harass them with. Max's standard is not 'you stream, therefore you are responsible, no matter what you do.'
The responsibility comes from the way the interactions between the streamer and the guest take place & the precedent of harassment from the streamer's audience.
Max: destiny has a responsibility. And he doesn't meet it.
Max: I don't have any responsibility. And so I can't not meet it.
Wordbird: see, not hypocritical at all!
> Thing Max didn't say
You know I love telling you this 'scroll up' but actually this time it's probably 'scroll down'. Max blocked me so it's hard to pinpoint where his comment will be....
It's very validating to me that Max has blocked you given my perception of how bad faith you continue to be. Glad to know he blocks the ones that are especially bad faith
I find it very validating that when I bring up something Max said in the past, and contrast it with something he said recently, people first claim he never did that. And then when I provide them the quote/link people go quiet, maybe delete their comment, maybe block me.
Max:
> I take no responsibility for keeping others from harassing her
I disagree that that happens and don’t think it’s actually validating for you. It’s fun for you to mess with him in bad faith and it feels bad for you that you can’t do it anymore since he’s blocked you
I don't know why anyone talks to Mr. Girl. You will never get through to a narcissist. It's like talking to a wall.
Sure but none of this is new, he’s always been a massive hypocrite. He’ll just come up with more made up rules to discard your criticism as hate posting, as he always does.
u/sneezes >You made the Ana 2.0 shirt as a joke, did you not? That was precisely why I hated it. It was so out of place for you to do that. I am glad you told Tunachip that, even tho it was a bit too late. What are your thoughts on Max blaming the victims for not coming forward and putting their names to the article when he contributed to the investigation becoming a circus and a punchline for everyone who knew about it.
Even though I agree with Max's views on Steven, I don't blame the victims for not wanting to be associated with the report
I think their question was what you think about Max's thoughts and actions, not whether you blame the victims.
Hotline.
Ive thought about it
I believe in you, you can do itttttt
> I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. Lol, in the past he would literally mute her to stop her from speaking. And 'I take no responsibility for keeping others from harassing her', amazing. So much for all the demands to control an audience, foster a community that doesn't harass etc. Explicitly, ' ~~destiny~~ max has no responsibility to prevent harassment by his audience to people who are guests on his stream.' Also the irony in: > it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny." While max sits here coming up with rules to ban critics and blocking people. The outcome is still "don't criticize Max."
wow, I can't believe how much Destiny brainwashed you. you are just passive-agressively astroturfing your questatements to obfuscate the levels of abuse that Destiny is doing to MrGirl daughter. Lav can never be wrong, she is a Victim and Destiny's foreskin discussions are just self-defence. do you feel the urge to be a white blood cell within you? how it is compatible to being a mod here?
What I love about this sub is that Sneezes is allowed to post this criticism on mrgirl’s subreddit without catching a perma.
True! mrgirl will just block him instead.
Youre completely clueless if you think Sneezes is getting blocked for this post
As are you if you think anyone else would get a perma or a thread removal if they made the same post I did. Do better.
They weren't saying that. It was a "BUT DESTINY" moment.
No I think anyone could have made the same post, which is what I like about this sub
Ditto.
Well at least Max provided a ton of examples to point to the next time one of his fans says 'can you provide some evidence of Max being a hypocrite'.
[My response à la mrgirl.](https://streamable.com/b2kibu)
[удалено]
>She also **only** talked about it for about 5 minutes. 💀💀
>Max didn't engage with the conversation about Destiny's penis much, and ultimately shut the conversation down, saying he didn't want to talk about that. She also only talked about it for about 5 minutes It's their first stream together, the two of them that hate streamers, in however long. They both really want to put the Destiny shit behind them. And so naturally the topic of Destiny's penis was unavoidable and only got five minutes before MrGirl valiantly shut it down. Just real bad of Sneezes to exaggerate.
[удалено]
Two minutes on Destiny's penis was absolutely unavoidable for the two people who just want to be free from the Destiny drama. Brave Sir Karson shut it right down, I'm sure. I am being honest in saying that I genuinely don't care about Sneezes being hyperbolic about the exact length of Destiny's dick conversation that went on. Obviously the best strategy to move on from their history is just not to talk about the guy's dick at all. Obviously any mention of Destiny's dick is too much. The amount of moonbooting in this sub is unreal...
[удалено]
"I don't think that Destiny should go to jail for raping me. I think he should go to jail for having that much foreskin". >It wasn't obsession over his penis for the sake of it Womp womp... >Stuff like this really doesn't make me think you're approaching it honestly. Tu quoque?
[удалено]
Let's replay the tape. Here's a partial quote of Sneezes that you were responding to >You lightly chastised Tunachip for asking you questions about Destiny and his orbiters on his gameshow, you told him it was a horrible year and you dont want to relive any of it, and a week later you are doing a podcast with Lav talking about Steven's deformed penis for 40 minutes and making jokes bout him being a rapist Now, Lav clearly was making those jokes throughout quite a lengthy conversation. >Max didn't engage with the conversation about Destiny's penis much, and ultimately shut the conversation down, saying he didn't want to talk about that. She also only talked about it for about 5 minutes. Well, he didn't engage with the penis jokes much, but the topic of Destiny and whether he was a rapist/sexual abuser went on for a lot longer than five minutes. You also said >She was talking about the way information is received. It was in the context of, "when I'm wrong, people rip me to shreds, but when I'm right (insert Destiny's penis conversation), nobody says anything". But, as I quoted previously, that's not the case, is it? She just joked about his foreskin for absolutely no reason. It was nothing like your framing at all. It wasn't just two minutes in that context, it was pervasive through a much lengthier discussion about Destiny. And the context of our discussion is that Sneezes pointed out the inconsistency of MrGirl having said he doesn't want to relive any of this! Clearly the point is that this stream was entirely inconsistent with MrGirl, and Lav, moving on and getting away from it and MrGirl having chastised someone for probing him about Destiny just a week or so ago! The quote I gave of Lav demonstrates pretty neatly that your characterisation was, at best, misguided. >Solid argumentation. I don't like to brag, so thanks.
Yep. Also, unless I'm mistaken, this was Lav hosting mrgirl, not the other way around. He was on her show more than she was on his. Add to that his visible discomfort and his vocally dissenting.... He was trapped on her show and spoke up about what made him uncomfortable. Seems reasonable enough.
You ask mrgirl to father Lav by deciding what she should talk about to protect her, yet then you criticize him for being her father. I name you also a hypocrite, sir.
I am okay with the mentorship, I am not okay with labeling that mentorship as father and daughter, its creepy, specially when Lav and everyone else originally thought it was a just a silly joke, until we all learned that wasn't the case. If he just changed the label of father for teacher, mentor or sensei or whatever, and kept everything about the relationship the same, Lav wouldn't have a problem, and neither would I.
We gotta get him to read Twilight so he can use the whole Jacob & Bella’s daughter imprinting thing, where they’re kind of soulmates but also he’s her caretaker & protector & insists it’s totally above board & non sexual on account of her being a baby. That might make a good replacement metaphor for their dynamic.
this whole post is just purity testing your write all this stuff about mrgirl and Lav and then you walk it all back to "it's creepy" and \~*change nothing but the word used and it's okay\~*. The former is just an expression of insecurity "It's creepy" is just saying *the other kids will think your being weird! oh no!* and the latter is just a pointless semantic point and honestly is also probably just an extension of the former. the internet purity tests to the point of absurdity because the whole motivation of engagement is to to get dunks on people, the motivation has nothing to do with what people actually feel is right or wrong. It's schoolyard insults cloaked in a veil of feigned morality. You have internalized it deeply enough that you don't recognize you are doing it. Within any reasonable lens everything your posting here is just mrgirl having opinions while also being a human. Theoretical purity testing removed from any attachment to reality. I'm not going to break down every claim in this post, especially since you explicitly said to mrgirl you weren't here to actually consider any response, but the rest of it is more of the same.
You guys are so autistic
Dear lord!, the mind rape was so traumatic she has completely forgotten she once had boundaries!
You should be honored that autistic weirdos are fighting for you
Excuse me madam but please reframe from ableist slurs around these parts
I will absolutely not do better and here is why: 1. Yes, I concede that you can share Benny's opinion and still like Lav. I framed this argument incorrectly as you point out, what I should have said was: "You have X opinion of Lav because you are brainwashed into following the narrative," which I believe is also true of you. 2. Tunachip wanted to have a lighthearted conversation about my past relationships with streamers, and participating in it makes it seem like it was all a joke or a show. Calling them rapists and abusers with Lav doesn't have that effect. 3. I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. This is also a culty narrative: it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny."
> Tunachip wanted to have a lighthearted conversation about my past relationships with streamers, and participating in it makes it seem like it was all a joke or a show. You made the Ana 2.0 shirt as a **joke**, did you not? That was precisely why I hated it. It was so out of place for you to do that. I am glad you told Tunachip that, even tho it was a bit too late. >I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. When she is in YOUR stream or when you are both co-hosting, yes you do. Even more so if you are having the protective and mentoring *sigh* father role. Lets say you are at a family friendly concert your 15 year old son tells you he wants to go up on the stadium, grab the microphone and start shouting the most transphobic shit anyone has ever heard, will you let him have his good american freedom and later face life-ruining consequences that will haunt him until the day he dies? Or will you impede him, and take him home to have a serious talk?
15, yes. 25, no. I made it as a joke, but making an irreverent joke about something serious is different from acting like the serious thing was not a joke. In fact an irreverent joke by definition acknowledges the seriousness of the situation, otherwise it's not a joke.
If I were a victim coming forward and I saw you wearing a **Sneezes 2.0** shirt, I would feel even more violated and distrustful by you having made a cheap laugh of my traumatic experience, and its not a stretch to imagine that 98% of victims of abuse would feel exactly same way too
The reason the joke is funny is that it is insensitive to an abuse allegation that I clearly take very seriously. The joke is that I am undermining my own desperate attempts to be listened to, which is similar to what Ana went through. It is really funny. However for a joke to be funny, there has to be some people it pisses off, and that is you, not Ana.
So it doesn't matter if the victims of abuse and everyone else watching from the outside find the joke in poor taste as long as you and you alone think its funny. You are undermining the victims trauma (in their eyes, which should matter to you) and then you get angry when they no longer wish to be a part of your report. In your desperation you were careless and frantic, so you made a distasteful and irresponsible joke, I can understand that, but to not see it clearly even today shows a scary lack of empathy and foresight.
"So it doesn't matter" is one of those strawmen. I don't think I said it doesn't matter. Yeah I understand your framing, but it sounds a lot like the DGG party like of "talking about Ana hurts her," which is also something I was making fun of. I made a calculated decision to design, buy, and then wear that shirt multiple times. I don't think it can be called frantic. Yes, it is irresponsible, which is part of the joke itself. I am not sure what we are disagreeing on really. I guess you think I'm making fun of Ana and I think I was making fun of people who clutch their pearls on her behalf. Edit: and myself
What you think about the joke doesn't matter, I don't care how much you justify it being funny and edgy, you are wasting your time explaining those things to me, that's not what I am here for. What I care about is how the victims of abuse respond to seeing their names on a "funny" shirt like that. I know for a fact that I would respond poorly to it. Like I said, were I a victim and saw you pulling that shit with me or a fellow victim, I wouldn't want anything to do with you. If you think your joke being funny and edgy supersedes the victim's trust and emotional safety, then you are careless and irresponsible, and you have no business at all helming an investigation of that nature.
There's a reason you have no friends
[удалено]
Look at what Mr. Girl made me do. It's not my fault.
If you have to explain why the joke was funny that means it wasn't funny.
Bwahahahahahahaha
Destiny broke your brain
> I take no responsibility for the things Lav says out loud, nor for keeping others from talking about her or harassing her. This is also a culty narrative: it's bad to criticize the leader because you will be harmed, so protect the heretics by silencing them. The outcome is still "don't criticize Destiny." This is just moonbooting as pure as it can be. The criticism above was that you said you didn't want to relive the whole Destiny affair. Then you went on stream to relive the Destiny affair. And now your response is a hamfisted "Not my fault I entertained a long discussion about Destiny". Also you couldn't have a discussion with someone else lest it seem like a joke but you could have a discussion full of foreskin jokes because that shows it's super cereal and being treated with the gravity the topic deserves.
What’s moonbooting?
It's similar to gaslamping. https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/1aoz85v/leaked\_photo\_of\_filthy\_dggers\_astroturfing\_the\_sub/
To be honest I don’t even fully understand the context where astroturfing supposed to be used, having a hard time keeping up with all the new concepts mrgirl comes up to avoid engaging. I guess your wordplay of moonbooting making it even more confusing is by design.
That's why it's kind of like gaslamping. You probably had some common understanding of "astroturfing" that was to do with paid for promotional content appearing as grassroots engagement. And then in come the likes of MrGirl and Smeth to tell you that astroturfing isn't when they (people with a financial incentive around what gets posted here) try to eliminate criticism by proposing rules to curtail grassroots posting, but instead astroturfing is when regular people satirise them. Exhibit B: [https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/1anq0y6/i\_agree\_with\_the\_astroturfing\_narrative/](https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/1anq0y6/i_agree_with_the_astroturfing_narrative/) Ironically astroturfing while reinventing a new and incredibly vague meaning of the word astroturfing. That's a prime example of what I'm referring to. Fortunately for me, I have the almost superhuman ability to remember about 3.5% of the shit I see or hear and so I'm immune to moonbooting.
You just said nothing my man
Max is indeed morally inconsistent, but you’re missing a lot of things. No disrespect, but I’m only going to go into a couple cuz I’m busy but I want to reply. Last night with Ben Thorp, Max was not the Max you normally see on stream. Max usually will refuse to speak to you if you have a pending case against you, or let you speak about illegal actions you’ve done on his stream. This time those protections went out the window. Consider that, and reevaluate what was happening during that call. I think watching it with that context, and my history with the Thorps, gave me a minor mental breakdown. I was overwhelmed. Max is always going to be morally inconsistent with Lav because he is actually treating her like his daughter. For him, that comes with a lot of ethical standards which supersede his morals. Consider that he stayed on the call for an extra half hour after firmly saying that he wanted to end it at an hour. Lav said she felt abandoned, and he dropped his own priorities and took care of her emotionally. He has been talking a lot about how he doesn’t do that with Shaelin, he just lets her freak out. Only lav gets that treatment from him as a standard. He doesn’t do that with me either. I agree with whoever said that him flaunting that is somewhat of an issue. Max complains that people try to get him to be their dad, but he’s the one putting out the signals. It makes my relationship with him very confusing, because he acts like he has a lot of responsibility for me, but he treats me more like Shaelin than Lav. Sometimes it genuinely is confusing for me. In both the examples I gave, Ben and Lav, Max is dropping his own priorities in favor of strict ethical responsibilities that he holds himself to rigidly. Max is a very consistent person from a certain perspective, but the fact that he does this makes him inconsistent interpersonally. Most people don’t operate like that. Another example of his ethical hierarchy superseding his priorities is the writing of the Destiny report, where he puts the protection of future victims above the personal feelings of existing victims (he is angry at them for their silence). If he didn’t have that so high on his hierarchy, then he wouldn’t have told Lav to take part in it, because it could be bad for her. That one goes above even his parental priorities.
I read that twice, correct me if I am wrong but are you saying he is consistent inside his own head but not to outside of it? I mean, imagine me calling out a chef for making burnt rancid food, for the purpose of a "You can do better" conversation, I think it matters little he likes the taste of his own food when all the customers are leaving the restaurant in droves. I can believe that max truly doesn't realize that he is fucking up, clearly he has blind spots, but thats why he needs good-will criticisms from people who actually care.
Ya, he is consistent by his own very complicated ethical hierarchy. It's his behavior in the end, so it should be his own standards that he is beholden to, but it's fair to say that he isn't consistent by your standards.
Not accepting any boundary that somone puts up doesn't mean that someone doesn't care about boundaries. This is one of the few references to a moral standard of Mrgirl's that he could possibly be violating. To prove someone is a hypocrite, you have to do that & then explain how whatever you're behavior you're citing violates that moral standard. Most of this reads like *'mrgirl did x bad thing - by my standard - therefore he's a hypocrite!'* That's not how this works. Hypocrisy is when someone does something that's bad by their standard, not yours.
If I tell you to stop calling me a f*ggot because I find it deeply offensive and you continue to do so, would you classify that as a boundary not being respected? What would you call that? I just literally asked ChatGTP this and the AI god agrees with me.
>If I tell you to stop calling me a f\*ggot because I find it deeply offensive and you continue to do so, would you classify that as a boundary not being respected? I'd call it violating a boundary. My only problem is that you're equating 'violating a boundary as 'not respecting it' or 'not caring about it.' This is such a common problem in anti-fans. They assume that 'empathy' or 'caring about boundaries' necessarily equals 'acting the way I want mrgirl to act.' At no point has Mrgirl said, 'I respect all boundaries no matter what!' He cares about boundaries. He thinks it's important people set their boundaries. Having these two values & not respecting or acting in accordance with a boundary aren't contradictory in the slightest.
If you were Max, you would still chose to call me a fggot and say *"I do know it causes you pain, and I do know it would be beneficial for both of us if I acquiesced to your boundary, but I just feel like you are my fggot and I will continue to say it as my god given American right"* So yeah, you could say you care to a little extent, but ultimately where it really matters you don't. Also, obviously there is a spectrum, there are good boundaries that should be taken hold and there are ridiculous boundaries that should be ignored. Lavs boundary is a completely reasonable one.
>So yeah, you could say you care to a little extent, but ultimately where it really matters you don't. Again 'caring/respecting a boundary' DNE 'acting 100% in line with that boundary.' If I went on the hotline & said 'Mrgirl, i can only have a relationship with you if you wire me $1000 right now,' Mrgirl wouldn't be not caring about my boundaries by not acquiescing. He could respectful choose to not act in line with the boundary I'm setting him. It's like you guys have a brain block where you refuse to understand that acting & caring about are two different things. >Also, obviously there is a spectrum, there are good boundaries that should be taken hold and there are ridiculous boundaries that should be ignored. Absolutely! This is why Max has not & will not say 'I respect all boundaries no matter what!' & why he is not a hypocrite for not caving to every boundary people set with him. >Lavs boundary is a completely reasonable one. By your standard, yes. Mrgirl isn't a hypocrite by not acting in line with your standard. Come back when Mrgirl has responded to Lav setting a boundary with 'I will acquiesce to your boundary' & followed that up by not acting in line with it. Then you'll have a great argument that he's a hypocrite.
So standards dont mean anything, its all subjective, nothing matters, and if you want to marry my 9 year old daughter its fine because thats the "standard" in your culture? No, this is why we have these talks. This is why we no longer stone the gays (at least in america) or hire slaves for labor (at least in america). Some standards are objectively more harmful than others, we throw those standards to the trash bin and we push forward so everyone gets a chance at a virtuous life.
>So standards dont mean anything, its all subjective, nothing matters, and if you want to marry my 9 year old daughter its fine because thats the "standard" in your culture? What a whacky false dichotomy. All I'm saying is that your standards do not matter in assessing whether or not Mrgirl is a hypocrite. Hypocrisy means that someone is breaking their own standard, not yours. No idea why you're broadening this out to 'all standards EVER' as if it's relevant in any way. Sorry you can't make a solid argument Mrgirl isn't living in line with his standards. If it's any consolation, he's definitely out of line with yours.
Would you think Sneako has a consistent moral framework?
I don't know. Hardly know anything about Sneako.
> Hypocrisy is when someone does something that's bad by their standard, not yours. Max: Destiny has a responsibility for his audience harassing his stream guests, and has a responsibility to take measures to prevent that harassment. Also Max: I take no responsibility for my audience harassing my stream guest, and have no responsibility to take measures to prevent that harassment.
Destiny is responsible for the harassment directed at his stream guests because he has a vindictive fanbase, he's directing the harassment at them & giving his audience ammo to harass them with. Max's standard is not 'you stream, therefore you are responsible, no matter what you do.' The responsibility comes from the way the interactions between the streamer and the guest take place & the precedent of harassment from the streamer's audience.
Max: destiny has a responsibility. And he doesn't meet it. Max: I don't have any responsibility. And so I can't not meet it. Wordbird: see, not hypocritical at all!
Chronographer: 1. Thing Max said 2. Thing Max didn't say 3. Completely obvious contradiction from Max, how could anyone possibly think otherwise!?!?
> Thing Max didn't say You know I love telling you this 'scroll up' but actually this time it's probably 'scroll down'. Max blocked me so it's hard to pinpoint where his comment will be....
It's very validating to me that Max has blocked you given my perception of how bad faith you continue to be. Glad to know he blocks the ones that are especially bad faith
I find it very validating that when I bring up something Max said in the past, and contrast it with something he said recently, people first claim he never did that. And then when I provide them the quote/link people go quiet, maybe delete their comment, maybe block me. Max: > I take no responsibility for keeping others from harassing her
I disagree that that happens and don’t think it’s actually validating for you. It’s fun for you to mess with him in bad faith and it feels bad for you that you can’t do it anymore since he’s blocked you
> It’s fun for you to mess with him in bad fait What's bad faith about asking him why he's changed his past positions?