Reporting the mods

I have no idea how the hell anyone is supposed to infer that you're using a term that means "pubic hair", because that is a bizarre fucking way to describe a situation in the first place. You're making an EXTRA effort to be even more unclear than you naturally are. You're still obviously being offensive, which doesn't actually make it any better than being CLEAR and offensive. And if anyone is curious about what the fuck you're even trying to say, they get slapped in the face with a picture of surprised genitals.

Good job.

Or, I guess, someone asks you what you're trying to say... and you tell them it's public hair. Thereby completely defeating the last semblance of a point of using this term in the first place.

Why bring up this term in the first place if people SHOULDN'T look it up? Who communicates in a style that says 'here is a word i am using to describe the situation, which i am using because you don't know what it means. Also, don't look it up. TRULY I HAVE MASTERED THE ART OF COMMUNICATION.'

Every conscious decision you make serves only to make communication even harder, and you still have the nerve to say that this is a ~~~both sides~~~ situation. 'Yes, I made up my own definitions for preexisting words and ignored 90% of the posts directed at me, but ummm YOU made an effort to understand what I was saying and looked up this word I used (except I didn't WANT you to look it up) (which i never said) (but you still should have been able to magically intuit its meaning) so honestly it is your fault that I'm being sexually inappropriate, and you are an ass_shicking hippo (which means hypocrite, duh, you're basically a paranoid schizophrenic for thinking it had anything to do with hippos)'

 

Nope! I saw it at the time, and decided I didn't want to discuss it.

And cruelty is never justified, whether it's 'in answer' to something or not.

Hint: almost everyone else handles being wiggled better. You can ask Alix. That doesn't mean that anyone's required to show you or tell you about what's being wiggled to give you examples of better behavior: it's already been pointed out to you several times that you were being abusive and that it was not good.

 

Even if this is true, it is not an excuse. And, quite frankly: No one but you has escalated in any of these conflicts. Everyone has consistently responded to you more kindly than you were treating them. You may not realize this. There's two reasons for that:

1. You are habitually cruel and don't think anything of it, and don't think about how it affects people. You don't see your posts as cruel even when they clearly are.
2. You are easily-offended and take polite and reasonable remarks as insults and personal attacks. See, for instance, your question about spock's perfectly reasonable and polite post which you thought of as a "meltdown".

This makes it look to you like you're in any way at all the victim of escalation, but it's just not true. You are the aggressor, and you are the one escalating.

 

No.

It wouldn't help much. Because I have post-editing powers, I mostly edit my posts rather than them being wiggled, or just soft-delete them, so right now, I have exactly one wiggled post, which was a poorly-timed argument on some point. But also, it doesn't matter much.

 

spock is absolutely not being nasty to you. reading aggression or nastiness into her very reasonable sounding posts is a you problem.

 

If you want to really split hairs, when i failed to understand your extremely unclear ass_shicking hippo, comment, you first clarified that duhhhhh by ass_shicking you clearly meant ass-sucking (and said I was like a paranoid schizophrenic). And in your literal next comment in the very same conversation, you let me know that hippo obviously means hypocrite.

As is typically the case, additional context doesn't actually make you look better.

 

you started being cruel right off the bat. this is easily accessible and documented right on this forum.

it's not us reading cruelty into your posts. it's you directly being cruel.

 

No, you're just cruel by default, even when you're not actively lashing out.

lmaooo

if i needed a break, it probably would have been

Spoiler: self-harm

After you threatened to send videos of you cutting while yelling 'shut up spock'

Or

Spoiler: similar but worse, with bonus sexual nonsense

saying you wanted to 'skull-fuck me into splitting my own wrists and painting the bathtub a beautiful shade of red'

But I continue to be completely fine, and the humor that is brought into my life by your persistent (and futile) efforts to upset me just gives me the energy to keep engaging with this nonsense. If I couldn't laugh so much at how hard you try to find some way to hurt me, then I probably would need a break at this point, but you bring enough joy into my life to keep me going :)

LMAOOOOOOOOOO SHERLOCK HOLMES??? Or a conspiracy theorist maybe???

Oh my god, get your story STRAIGHT XDDD

 

No, it isn't. We have lots of supporting evidence for that. You opened with your interest in the PPC, you talked about fatlogic... Which is to say, you started out with talking about your interest in and appreciation of things defined entirely by cruelty and contempt. We also have your comment that someone you used to know "deserved an undignified death". You have been like that all the time; not always actively-cruel, but always contemptuous of other people. Furthermore, the lashing out itself is excessively cruel. I've seen many people here lash out at other people when stressed. None of them, not one, have been as persistently cruel as you have when "lashing out".

 

Spoiler: not actually interested in a fatlogic derail, but context!

And honestly, the whole hamplanet conversation is still a part of very, very recent history, which is also a conversation where I engaged with her and tried to explain what some of the issues with that term and her use of it were.

And for bonus points, I had posted elsewhere about how moderating her participation in that thread was making it difficult for me to keep working on healthier habits without nosediving into disordered eating. Since she's tried to hurt me in every other way that has occurred to her, I have no reason to believe she'd hesitate for a moment to make a shamelessly fatphobic attack, especially if I'd ~shown weakness~.

It was hilarious either way! And that is something she apologized for. But I'm still hella skeptical of her assertions she had no idea it could possibly be taken that way, or of her assertions that she wouldn't have wanted to imply any fat-shaming along her way. Self-harm threats, yes, fat-shaming no? I'm equally unmoved either way, but it's extra funny she's calling me the hypocrite here XD