Categories
4chan antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? attention seeking doxing gaslighting grandiosity gross incompetence hypocrisy irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA reddit sexual exploitation straw feminists

Is Rantic, the supposed viral marketing firm behind the Emma Watson nude pics hoax, still playing the internet like a fiddle?

EmmaYouAreNet.com now redirects to this site.
EmmaYouAreNext.com now redirects to this site.

So it’s official: the Emma You Are Next web site, which was threatening to release nude pictures of Harry Potter actress Emma Watson, is a hoax. The site now redirects traffic to the home page of something called Rantic, a mysterious supposed “social media marketing enterprise” with a reputation for hoaxes.

Rantic is now claiming that the real agenda behind its website was a noble one: to expose the evils of leaked celebrity nudes – and, by painting 4channers as the evil hackers behind it all, to get 4chan itself taken down.

And somehow, to do this, they had to threaten to release nude pics of Emma Watson? It’s like fighting death threats against women – by sending death threats to women. The idea that this is a feminist “false flag” — an idea already being floated in Men’s Rightsy circles — is plainly ridiculous. Rantic’s actions are about as unfeminist as its possible to get.

Indeed, it seems pretty clear that Rantic’s new site is as much of a hoax as its last one.

Rantic’s own, er, “explanation” for the Emma Watson site is a masterpiece of concentrated bullshit:

We have been hired by celebrity publicists to bring this disgusting issue to attention. The recent 4chan celebrity nude leaks in past 2 months have been an invasion of privacy and is also clear indication that the internet NEEDS to be censored. Every Facebook like, share & Twitter mention will count as a social signature — and will be step closer to shutting down www.4chan.org.

Nothing about this makes any sense whatsoever. How do you protect celebrities from threats by threatening a celebrity? How do you use the Emma You Are Next hoax to get 4chan taken down … when everyone now knows that you, not anyone on 4chan, was behind the hoax?

Add to this a call for censorship that seems calculated to enrage the internet masses, and it’s hard not to conclude that Rantic is still playing the internet like a fiddle. For what aim I don’t know. Maybe, like some Men’s Rightsers we could mention, they figure that bad publicity – scratch that, catastrophic publicity – is better than none.

That’s more or less what Business Insider has concluded. In a piece published this morning, BI’s James Cook writes

Rantic Marketing doesn’t exist. This wasn’t a marketing stunt at all, but a social experiment run by the most notorious gang of pranksters on the internet.  …

Rantic Marketing is a fake company run by a gang of prolific internet spammers used to quickly capitalize on internet trends for page views. The group go by a variety of different names. Collectively, they’re known as SocialVEVO … The only known video footage of the group is a rap song about pickles that they used dubious spam techniques to make incredibly popular. The song used to have over 8 million views on YouTube.

As for that supposed plan to shut down 4chan? It’s only served to rally 4chan’s defenders.

In any case, the best way to fight celebrity leaks isn’t to shutter 4chan. It’s to find and prosecute those who’ve hacked celebrity nudes (including photos of several young women who were underage when the photos were taken) – and those who’ve knowingly spread them around the internet.

It may be hard to find the original hackers, but it’s certainly not hard to find those who distributed the nudes. Hint: Look at Reddit. Hundreds of thousands of Redditors were involved in what became known as TheFappening, and Reddit itself apparently profited handsomely from the attention and traffic.

Though the original TheFappening subreddit was belatedly shut down, leaked celebrity nudes are still being distributed openly on Reddit. This is criminal activity. Enforce the laws.

And Rantic, whatever your game is — just. fucking. stop.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

206 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Falconer
6 years ago

My mom used to kick us out and make us play outside sometimes. Partially so we didn’t spend too much time in from of the TV and Nintendo and I’m assuming so she could get some space and maybe quiet to do her work (she went back to college when we were kids).

I am foreseeing a time when I will be kicking my kids out into the back yard so that *I* can get some time on the Nintendo.

I am also foreseeing a time when I’ll have to say that I won’t run D&D with them if the chores aren’t done.

Kootiepatra
Kootiepatra
6 years ago

This whole “HA, it was to raise awareness” shtick feels eerily similar to the fiasco surrounding Sam Pepper at the moment, a content creator for YouTube. [CW: sexual harassment/threats]

I had never heard of this YouTuber before this, but apparently he has a pretty big following and is known for being “edgy” and pulling pranks on people in his videos. A few days ago, he released a video where the “prank” was him hiding his arm under his sweatshirt so he could grab women’s butts on the street without their knowledge.

Rightfully, the YouTube community flipped out on him, including some YouTubers of major influence banning him from all of their future events and videos. People downvoted and reported the video for sexual harassment, and YouTube took it down. Pepper did not respond at all on social media about the controversy.

The next day, he released ANOTHER video, this time of a woman grabbing the butts of strange men on the street. It too was widely condemned, reported, and removed.

A short while later, he released a third video with the big reveal: It was all staged! It’s good that you were outraged, because sexual harassment is bad! This was allllllll to raise awareness for the one dude he knows who was abused in his marriage, and for Pepper himself who (apparently) has had his butt grabbed at events before! Social experiment! It’s all okay! Gotcha, audience. Of course he would NEVER grab women’s butts without their permission. How silly that you should think such a thing.

I haven’t seen any of Pepper’s critics who are willing to believe him. They may extend him a tenuous benefit of the doubt, but he is being widely accused of simply covering his tracks after his first video came caving in on him.

And now he has emailed threats to Laci Green, one of his foremost critics. So, yeah, it seems pretty darn hard to believe that this guy was at all interested in raising awareness of sexual harassment.

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

Food allergies: Short answer, nobody knows why they seem to be increasing among children in western “developed” countries. There are a couple hypotheses floating around. One is the “hygiene hypothesis” that fromafar2013 was talking about, and one is the whole “different gut bacteria” thing kirbywarp was talking about. They also find that, contrary to what pediatricians in western countries recommend, that children who are exposed to common allergens earlier rather than later tend to develop less food allergies.

Sorry. Find immunology kind of fascinating. Regarding the “hygiene hypothesis”: germs aren’t all bad. From what I see in the US, we’re so germophobic. And your immune system actually needs to be exposed to germs in order to work up a healthy defense. It wouldn’t surprise me if this is the reason why.

katz
6 years ago

The only acceptable outcome here is if Rantic turns out to be Frog Hammer.

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

First of all, in reply to Policy of Madness’s thank you, you’re welcome.

Second I replied to claytonkb, the author of “What are men’s rights?”. I said that one trait that is universal is that men dominate women. I said that my theory about how it happened is that when men realized that their upper-body strength can be used to hurt women, and therefore get what they want, men took this as a right to dominate women. I also said that just because a trait is universal doesn’t make it right.

Maybe I shouldn’t have said universal trait. However, I can safely say that it is a common trait.

Pocket Nerd
6 years ago

Thus Spake Kootiepatra:

And now he has emailed threats to Laci Green, one of his foremost critics. So, yeah, it seems pretty darn hard to believe that this guy was at all interested in raising awareness of sexual harassment.

No, no, no… See, Sam Pepper’s implicit threats of violence against Laci Green were just to raise awareness about threats of violence! And him calling her a “c*nt” was just to raise awareness about vaginas!

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

To put my last post another way might doesn’t make one right. A simple saying but it looks like the manosphere either doesn’t understand it or rejects it.

katz
6 years ago

ralmcg: …Did you say “I read an interesting essay” about a blog post you wrote?

Alex
6 years ago

I grew up in the 90s and I was allowed out without an adult when I was as young as 7yrs old. And since I was the eldest, my brother was allowed out at 6, as long as he was with me, and when I was 10, my 5 yr old sister was allowed out under my supervision. It’s not like we didn’t get into any trouble, but shit. We listened to “stranger danger” (never mind the danger at home), we stuck to areas we knew if we were alone and only went exploring new areas if one of our peers was with us (one of these adventures took my brother and I to the other side of the city just by following the train tracks; we were 10 and 11).

Our mom never knew all the places we went. We were just told to be home for supper and after that as soon as the streetlights came on. We were okay. We knew the area around us pretty intimately for several miles and if we had in been any danger, we’d have known where to run and where to hide. I don’t think adults give kids enough credit these days. My mom fucked up in a lot of ways, but letting us play outside unsupervised wasn’t one of them.

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

Katz, it wasn’t my essay. It was written by claytonknob on “The Liberdade” wordpress site. I thought it would be an interesting read about how at least one man views rights, especially the rights of men in family cases.

beegees
beegees
6 years ago

Also, for some (unintentional) hilarity in the “all types of VAGINAS” vein here’s Roosh’s NSFW joke take on different types of vulva. He supposed to be making fun of how different vulva look but he doesn’t even get the names of the parts right. 😉

informash12358
informash12358
6 years ago

I spent a lot of time playing outside in the dirt and I still developed a plethora of allergies. I do kinda wonder if they’d be even worse if I had stayed indoors.

littlekatze
6 years ago

4chan: These people think we’re horrible! Let’s set up this strawman to say we need to be censored and watch those same people defend us against the thought police! We’re controlling their opinions through our mastery of social media and stuff!Mwahahahaha!
…And that’s how it really happened.

Allergies: These theories are both very plausible but I’m sure there’s a genetic component to all this. My grandfather had a ton of different allergies against pollen, animal hair and dust mites(back in the day they called that “the boy gets colds a lot”) even though I’m pretty sure he spend plenty of time outside as a kid. And, look, three out of five of his children and five out of eight grandchildren have the exact same or partially the same allergies.
So I believe there’s a genetic component as well as the fact that a lot more children are tested for allergies today than, say, twenty years ago. But gut bacteria and/or germs probably play a role, too. Or maybe it’s epigenetics.
Who knows, I’m not a scientist.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

My state has become the first to ban antibiotic soap. It takes effect next year I think. It’ll be interesting to see if it results in less allergy frequency and severity and fewer cases of resistant bacterial infections.

leftwingfox
6 years ago

So much for that narrative. This whole thing is a bottomless maelstrom of lulz, apparently.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

Everything is false flag. Nobody actually means anything they say or do, with the only victims being the ones caught in the crossfire. Nothing to do but don our tinfoil hats and wait for the lizard people to make their move.

(Actually, there should be a rewrite of 1984, where the new totalitarian regime maintains control by claiming everything is satire or sarcasm. RANDOM STORY TIME!)


That evening, the Not Police busted in to Winston’s apartment with a battering ram painted to look like a clown’s face. This was part of a new campaign to alert citizens of the dangers of a flimsy door or rusty locks. They called out their usual phrase, “THIS IS A RAID! Just kidding!” before storming in to Winston’s living room in full riot gear, guns drawn and sight lasers painting a small bead on Winston’s forehead.

The room was silent for a moment before the captain burst out laughing. One by one, the Not Police lowered their weapons and lifted their face shields, high-fiving each other on a well done prank. Winston laughed along just as he had been taught, though he couldn’t help feeling a bit annoyed that they hadn’t performed the prank raid earlier in the day when he was wearing pants.

Wiping tears from his eyes, the captain approached Winston with a pen and note pad. “Winston Smith, you are under arrest for treason against the community, conspiracy, fraud, and wearing mismatched socks.”

Winston looked down. He wasn’t wearing socks. The captain slapped his knee and laughed uproariously.

“Ha HA! Just kidding. No, this is simply an example of what could happen if you ever decided to break any laws. Now come along with me.”

“What? Why?”

The captain’s smile disappeared immediately and was replaced by a rather stern frown.

“This is a mock arrest. You’d hardly understand how an arrest works if we just told you about it, now would you? Come along with me, you’ll be held in a prison cell overnight. In a real arrest, you’d be held for much longer, you see.”

“Of course, I see,” replied Winston, not seeing at all.

In the corner, one of the Not officers loosed a giggle that he completely failed to suppress. The captain whipped around to face him. “Jenkins!” He hollered. “What is so funny?!”

“Sir,” Jenkins replied, “Sorry sir, it’s just that you called it a ‘prison cell,’ sir.”

“Hrmph, spoil the surprise, would you, Jenkins?” The captain turned back around and addressed Winston again.

“Sorry about that, we aren’t actually taking you to a prison cell. It’s just a little room in the basement of the Not Police Station where we put a couple bars and a cot. It’s actually rather pleasant. Now please, come with me.”

Winston spent that night in the basement of the Not Police station, on an uncomfortable little cot surrounded by hastily constructed iron bars. Unfortunately, he wasn’t given a chance to put on pants. The Not Officers insisted this would add to the illusion of the mock arrest and incite the proper shameful feelings one should experience in a real arrest. At least they had been kind enough to give him some hot chocolate.

strivingally
6 years ago

Is “raising awareness!” the new “just kidding!/being ironic!/it was satire!”, as a get-out-of-jail-free card when people are called out for doing horrible things?

And for the record Sam Pepper’s got a track record of those kinds of videos – he and his supporters trying to pretend it’s about that one video are intentionally disregarding a pattern of treating women’s boundaries like they’re an inconvenience to his particular form of “entertainment”.

Then again I’m a huge Laci Green fan so I’m probably just white knighting. *rolls eyes*

littlekatze
6 years ago

Kirbywarp, that story is awesome.

grumpyoldnurse
6 years ago

@ kirbywarp – double plus good. Or something.

::fires glitter cannon indiscriminately::

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

Time for a sports break. Here is the finals of the 2014 Women’s Rugby World Cup. Enjoy.

Pocket Nerd
6 years ago

Thus Spake Zarastrivingally:

Then again I’m a huge Laci Green fan so I’m probably just white knighting. *rolls eyes*

I don’t like Laci Green, and I STILL think threats of violence and gendered insults are nasty (and unfunny) behavior. (So is groping or pinching women without their consent, even if you’re doing it “raise awareness.”)

So I guess I’m… black knighting? Reverse knighting? Mid knighting? I’m not up-to-date on my dismissive anti-equality snarl words.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

@WWTH

Routine administration of antibiotics to livestock has about a zillion times higher impact on antibiotic-resistant bugs than soap. Nevertheless, I haven’t used antibiotic soap in forever, because the most common antibiotic agent in them (triclosan) has been implicated as an endocrine disruptor. The FDA is reviewing it, but I decided I didn’t need to wait for the inevitable “All clear!” that I won’t believe anyway.

Turns out I’m just as healthy with regular Ivory soap. YMMV of course.

malcolm johnston (@malcolmingabout)

Just goes to show that it’s not hard to dupe the manboobzers into making fools of themselves.

Kevin K
Kevin K
6 years ago

Until I hear otherwise, I’m going to assume that Rantic is just another synonym for 4chan.
Same assholes, different cess pool.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

Kind of OT guys, but I’m arguing with an MRA on xojane about the notion of “women date alpha assholes when young then marry betas for their money”. He tried using a burden of proof fallacy on me, then linked to a blog post HE wrote where the references were to his other blog posts plus one to Heartiste’s and one to Rational Male. Shoddy evidence indeed. Now apparently it’s my turn and I need to disprove his claim…but that’s like trying to prove the sky is blue.

How do you give evidence for obvious reality? I tried arguing that women are people who think and feel the same way as men and linked to some testimonies of women describing why they married their partners (love and personality) but he dismissed it as “tinted glasses” and “anecdotal evidence” vs Heartiste’s “science” (i cant even).

If knowing that women are people is “wearing tinted glasses” then I weep for the manosphere. I flounced from that debate as I know ill get nowhere. And I always stick with my flounces. Always.

But seriously, how do you “prove” women marry for love? It’s so fucking obvious.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

Here’s a survey that might help you:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/11/18/the-decline-of-marriage-and-rise-of-new-families/

It’s recent (2010) and has the following takeaways:

Asked to evaluate the reasons they got married, married respondents place the greatest value on love (93% say this is a very important reason), followed by making a lifelong commitment (87%), companionship (81%), having children (59%), and, at the bottom of the list, financial stability (31%).

If economic security is no longer a key reason people marry, the lack of economic security nonetheless appears to be a key reason people don’t get married.

But the survey also finds that the less education and income people have, the more likely they are to say that in order to be a good marriage prospect, a person must be able to support a family financially. Taken together, these findings suggest that those with less income and education are opting out of marriage not because they don’t value the institution or aspire to it benefits, but because they may doubt that they (or a potential spouse) can meet the standards they impose on marriage.

For both husbands (or male partners) and wives (or female partners), the three qualities most widely cited as being “very important” are being a good parent, being caring and compassionate, and putting one’s family before anything else. Nearly three-quarters or more say each of these traits is very important to being a good spouse or partner.

I don’t see a breakdown in answers by gender, but you don’t get a 93% rating for “love” without the vast majority of both men and women buying into this rationale.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

@sunnysombrera:

But seriously, how do you “prove” women marry for love? It’s so fucking obvious.

You ask women. There is no better method of assessing motivation unless you have a carefully thought out and put-together experiment to bring out that motivation. He’s got a hell of a job trying to provide evidence for his position; you are perfectly allowed to say “that’s not good enough, you haven’t made your case strongly enough that I need to refute it.”

I flounced from that debate as I know ill get nowhere.

Good. What’s the point in debating someone who dismisses any actual evidence you provide while claiming his own “evidence” is solid when it isn’t? Not everyone is worth trying to convince.

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

sunnysombrero:

From the Pew Research Center:

Among married people, 93% say love is a very important reason to get married; 84% of unmarried people say so. Men and women are equally likely to say love is a very important reason to get married.

You’ll see that they didn’t find that women “con a ‘beta male’ into marriage so they can live off his paycheck after years of fun with ‘alpha male bad boys.'”

Another area you could look at is average number of sexual partners; if I’m remembering correctly, women tend to have slightly less than men, but both are about the same. This would put the lie to women “riding the cock carousel” in their youth and having a lot of sex with a lot of different men ( of course, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with having a lot of sex with a lot of different people, and you can throw that little factoid at ’em, too) and then settling down to marry a financially secure “beta male” when they “hit the wall.” Of course, you could also put the burden of proof back on the MRA – even if a woman has sex with the “alpha males” when young and then “settles down” later, how on earth do they know that woman isn’t marrying for love? I mean, having fun while one is young and single and then finding someone you’d want as a life partner when one is older and has different priorities – that’s not exactly unheard of.

But basically, the whole, “alpha fucks, beta bucks” thing is just a whine about how those lousy women won’t have sex with him. He can’t prove that women are only having sex with “alpha males.” Because there’s is no proof, because women are human beings that have different sexual preferences, just like men.

And where do lesbians fit in with this? You could ask ’em that, too.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

I’ll note that if your MRA comes back and says that This Isn’t Evidence™ (as he might) on the grounds that people lie on surveys, you’d be within your rights to point out that that makes any and all postulates in the social sciences unfalsifiable, and you’re now outside the bounds of science and into the realm of fantasy, where he clearly wants to be.

Pocket Nerd
6 years ago

Thus Spake Zarasunnysombrera

But seriously, how do you “prove” women marry for love? It’s so fucking obvious.

I don’t think I’d even try. A PUA and a few random blog posts aren’t reliable sources; I’d simply have said “Ha ha ha NO. How about some citations of peer-reviewed research?”

Personally, when I hear the “Women Only Like Assholes!” argument, I point out women aren’t a homogenous group, any more than men are. They are just as complicated and diverse as men are. Sometimes a man or woman is looking for a no-strings hookup, and may not care that the hookup isn’t a very nice person. Some men and women marry for love, but some men and women marry for convenience, or money, or for complicated and private legal reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with romance. In general, it’s not other people’s business.

There’s also a lot of misogyny tied up with WOLA!, but I won’t get into that here and now… though I will point out the implicit contradiction in MRAs and PUAs ranting about “Women Only Like Assholes!” in one breath and in the next whining about the character flaws of the “bitches” they dated. So… if a woman dates a man who is not very nice, it’s because women are evil, but if a man dates a woman who is not very nice, it’s because women are evil. Remember Rule One of the Manosphere: It’s Always Women’s Fault.

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

Ninja’d!

Aerinea
Aerinea
6 years ago

I’m fine with people using females as a collective term for women and girls as long as they’re also using males as a collective for men and boys. Granted, once females and males are being used, I also prefer age groups being referred to as infant, young, adolescent, adult, and elderly. If you want to use men or boys, you had better use women or girls as well. Terminological consistency is a thing.

I also prefer that if someone wants to use females and males, what they write had better be scientific, with actual data. Otherwise, the terms are just dehumanizing.

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

Since the manosphere basically believes that genetic programming is the cause of gender stereotypes I bet they think, “I’m programmed to rule over feeeemmmaaallleees and no amount of thinking otherwise will prevent it.” I call it a lot of baloney.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

Oh, oh, I found the full report. If you want to play his game, just link him to the 122-page report here:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2010/11/pew-social-trends-2010-families.pdf

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

malcolm johnston (@malcolmingabout) | September 24, 2014 at 1:33 pm
Just goes to show that it’s not hard to dupe the manboobzers into making fools of themselves.

Because writing about how something has been shown to be a hoax is being duped into making a fool of yourself.

It's A Furret (@RicksWriting)

i.e. someone from 4chan knowingly putting this up to have a convenient strawman enemy (“THOUGHT POLICE! FREEZE PEACH!”) – or else it’s not them, but some other group who’s actually trying to play 4chan by getting them riled up.

Well if the whole Five Guys thing is any indication, the saw “4chan is not your personal army” is very easily circumvented when you can outrage them enough to WANT to band together. Want 4chan to stop moping and snapping at each other? Attack their sense of unity and their pride in their ethical foundation (that of non-censorship). Even if you’re involved in 4chan, that’s kinda what you have to do to make them behave and organize.

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

Sorry, Policy of Madness, but I had to use the word “female”, even stretched out, to mock the manosphere and those who believe that domination over another group, especially when hurtful, is natural in humans and can’t be changed.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

Here’s an interesting bit from the full report:

Men and women differ only slightly in these evaluations. Men are somewhat more likely than women to view companionship as very important to marriage (76% vs. 69%). They are also more likely than women to say that financial stability is a very important reason to get married (34% vs. 28%).

I’d like to emphasize:

They [men] are also more likely than women to say that financial stability is a very important reason to get married (34% vs. 28%).

That’s kind of the opposite of what your MRA claims, isn’t it?

Kakanian
Kakanian
6 years ago

If the theory were true, all assholes would be poor and not engaged and the rich would be the nicest people on the planet, I suppose. The two categories he’s using to describe dating only contain a hilariously tiny fraction of all datable people in the first place.

There are plenty of rich or married celebrities you can point towards to show that. Like those football stars or that south african Paralymics runner who was all over the news recently.

hellkell
hellkell
6 years ago

Just goes to show that it’s not hard to dupe the manboobzers into making fools of themselves.

The only fool here is you, Malcolm.

ralmcg
ralmcg
6 years ago

Time for a man in short denim shorts break. Yes, that’s me with the not perfect legs.
http://i1315.photobucket.com/albums/t586/ralmcg/photo0051_zps5f3bb025.jpg

ikanreed
ikanreed
6 years ago

@Policy of Madness

I suspect that’s your “rational” MRAs(yes, I’d say that they and their cohort of similar thinkers make up at least 6% of men, sadly) responding to the survey that actually make up the difference there. Because they couch things in those terms, it’s intuitive that, to them, money is what matters to anyone else. They can’t construct a nuanced non-greedy world.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
6 years ago

@ikanreed

Were that true (and I have no reason to believe or doubt it) then the insistence that women marry beta bucks would amount to projection, wouldn’t it?

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

Sorry, this is way late to the allergy discussion, but:

Or is it the result of helicopter parenting and wanting their kids to be special snowflakes?

No, no, no, no, no. Please no. Allergies aren’t the result of “snowflake parenting”, any more than autism or schizophrenia.

One of my twins has severe peanut and egg allergy, and I’m the farthest thing from a helicopter parent there is. Nobody would willingly sign up for parenting an allergic kid if they knew what it entailed.

It sucks. It hurts to watch my son realize he’s not like the other kids, to have him be afraid of food, to tell him no all the time. It sucks to scrutinize labels and have to vigilantly police what he puts in his mouth and still get burned periodically and end up in the E.R. from time to time. It’s a pain in the ass. I hate it. I have no idea where this came from. Nobody in my family has these allergies, and as far as I know, nobody in his father’s family has them either.

Having dietary restrictions doesn’t mean kids are frail, hypochondriac, or overprotected. FWIW, my peanut-allergy guy is currently the only kid in his preschool who can make it all the way across the monkey bars. That’s because I’m a lazy old-fashioned submarine parent who would rather loaf on the bench at the playground, so he’s had a longer leash physically than other kids his age. I wish I could have been similarly laid-back about what he eats, but fate had other ideas.

As for banning treats from schools, that sucks too, and I wish we didn’t have to live in that kind of world. True, it’s done primarily to minimize the potential for accidental contact, but it’s also about fairness. Do you want to be the one to tell the one allergic kid that no, he can’t have a cupcake, he has to sit and watch everyone else enjoy them? And it’s not just allergies – it’s diabetic kids, and PKU kids, and other kids who might be on restricted diets. (Plus, I imagine teachers aren’t too keen on having to deal with 25 sugared-up children for the rest of the afternoon).

Sorry for the rant. I definitely agree that helicopter parenting is Not A Good Thing, but it’s totally unrelated to allergies.

The two categories he’s using to describe dating only contain a hilariously tiny fraction of all datable people in the first place.

And those categories don’t even describe any one individual. The same person can exhibit “alpha” behaviors in some domains, and “beta” behaviors in others. For example, how “alpha” is it to be constantly fretting over your notch count and your social value, and shelling out $$ to manosphere hucksters? Isn’t it way more alpha to recognize bullshit, dismantle it, and, say…mock it?

I wouldn’t even be able to categorize the men in my life as “alphas” or “betas”. It’s a useless framework that shouldn’t be taken seriously.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

Buttercup: All the men in my life are alphas in their own way.

littlekatze
6 years ago

I wonder…If it were true that all women first fuck a lot of alphas and then settle down with some beta to pay the bills, what happens to the used up alphas who have become too old or too ugly for the cock carousel? Do they become betas or do they just wander off and starve somewhere (seeing as they can’t cook or do laundry)?

LBT
LBT
6 years ago

RE: ralmcg

Interesting that he said that strength is a male principle. It makes it seem that females who have strength are not “real females”.

And men without strength? Gee, I wonder what they get labeled as…

RE: WWTH

Couldn’t the kids with severe allergies just not eat the homemade treats? Why deprive everyone else?

Do you really want to be the adult explaining to a gluten-intolerant five-year-old why everyone in the class can have a cookie except them? I have friends who make gluten-free cookies, but most folks do not. I don’t even have food allergies, but I know enough people with weird sensitivities and seen the sort of social barrier that comes with being unable to eat others’ food that I don’t begrudge them. (Seriously. One of the people I know here is allergic to everything. EVERYTHING. I feel bad for her, because oh fucking god, you have no idea what this poor woman goes through to avoid an ER visit. Lactose, corn, gluten, grass, nightshades…)

Or is it the result of helicopter parenting and wanting their kids to be special snowflakes? Any thoughts?

Some people don’t discover their severe allergies until adulthood. (See: my gulten-intolerant friend who just stopped eating a lot as a kid because the pain was so bad.) It’s just now people are more aware, so parents are a little less likely to go, “Shut up, bread can’t make you sick, just eat the fucking bread.”

roguepixie
roguepixie
6 years ago

The linked blog post about the supposed radfem conspiracy is really funny. At some point, the blogger decided that the whole ostensible 4chan threat was a feminist conspiracy. And now that it seems to be the work of garden variety trolls out to cause trouble, he’s even more convinced that it’s a feminist conspiracy.

And then at the end, he concludes that he must be Cassandra for having foreseen it all… Conspiracy theorists. Confirmation bias. So weirdly lovable.

(I also noticed that the “founder and CEO” of Rantic goes by the name of Brad Cockingham… Eep, trolls.)

The alpha/omega ratings idea—I think it’s funny that they rate people to begin with. But what’s even funnier is that they put people with the worst possible traits at the top of the whole system. Do they think it’s necessary to behave like an asshat in order to find a partner? Maybe that’s why so many of them are so bitter all the time.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Policy of madness,

Yeah, the antibiotics in livestock is terrifying. In addition to the resistance issue it messes with our gut flora. I wouldn’t be surprised if this had a lot to do with the obesity “epidemic” as the gut flora of thin and fat people are different.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Well of course I wasn’t trying to say all allergies are over dramatized. Just wondering why the increase.

Kids on restrictive diets understand they’re on one at a fairly young age right? I still don’t get why that means other kids can’t have treats. Disappointment management is an important thing to learn.