🗿 on Farcaster

bertwurst pfp

Gauging the Farcaster audience... are women choosing to objectify themselves, or are they being objectified, and some people can’t handle when hot women are good at things? Most (if not all) of the women you’re all vaguely alluding to aren’t posting thirst traps. They’re not being provocative. They’re smart. Funny. Consistent. Creative. And they're also hot, and that triggers your internalized (kind of) misogyny. Is there pretty privilege at play? Of course. I know all about pretty privilege, I mean look at me. But if you’re going to claim the leaderboard is full of people who got there by objectifying themselves, name names. Yes, there are gooners and simps here. Always will be. That’s not why there are women on the leaderboard. Some of y’all aren’t upset about the content. You’re upset that you like it, and you haven’t figured out how to metabolize that without blaming women. That’s not critical thinking. It’s just misogyny. And it’s tired. Do better. Look within. Log off. Touch some grass. Maybe pet a dog while you’re out there. We’re great at perspective.

26 replies

16 recasts

71 reactions

Panda 🐼 pfp

This post reads virtue signaling. It can be both. Women are objectified, no doubt about it. Some women are also intentionally leaning into it, and they have every right to do so. Arguing and lecturing misogynists doesn’t change them and accusing people of misogyny out of context also isn’t helpful.

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

bertwurst pfp

I totally agree, women are objectified, and some may choose to participate in the systems that reward that. AND they should be able to do so without shame!! But here’s where I disagree: Virtue signaling, to me, would’ve been making a vague, clout-chasing comment with no real point. This wasn’t that. It was a direct response to people implying that women in the top 30 only got there by using sex appeal. That kind of projection is misogyny. The context mattered, and maybe it got lost. Calling it out isn’t really about changing minds. It’s about pushing back so that kind, thoughtful people don’t internalize the same narratives. Some things are worth saying even if they don’t change everyone. This felt like one of them.

1 reply

0 recast

6 reactions

Panda 🐼 pfp

Appreciate the response :) and I get ya. I just find it interesting when @bias gets labeled a misogynist. As for things worth saying, bias called out woj plenty of times for being a Tate fan but no one cared and Farcaster even hired him. 🙃

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

bertwurst pfp

I think they misunderstood where I was coming from, and made a good point, but it was aside from what I was trying to point out (and still rooted in misogyny.) I think there's also an important distinction between calling someone a misogynist and saying that their argument is misogynistic or that a larger problem is rooted in misogyny! And I think bias fit into the latter there. I didn't know that about Woj so good on bias for calling it out, I hope they continue to do so even if it didn't get the attention it deserved last time!

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

🗿 pfp

I wasn’t even paying attn to whoever is on the leaderboard, I haven’t looked at that thing in probably 6 months I was just noting how it seems as though people were saying ANYONE throwing the phrase ‘thirst trap’ around is a misogynist, which is obv not true And obv not all images the women share here are “thirst” images But if it’s an image a woman wouldn’t send her dad, stepdad, male friend, friendzoned friend, what have you, that’s obv a seductive image, and the women posting those do know exactly what they’re posting when they post them Some of us, women included, don’t want to see hyperstimili imagery, or seductive imagery like this: we don’t come here for that type of thing: this is simply and absolutely not misogyny And I’m not saying the women or whomever posting seductive imagery have no right to do so; they have every right: I just have every right to mute it when I see it

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

bertwurst pfp

I saw where you were coming from! You were speaking broadly and I was speaking specifically. Ironically, I think this is a really good example of my point. This is not a thirst trap, this is a selfie. She is not choosing to objectify herself, she is being objectified. And that's the only part of your comment I was speaking on! I appreciate you engaging in the discussion and not having a knee-jerk reaction.

1 reply

0 recast

3 reactions