I don't mind pizzacake commics, but at this point just seeing the art style is enough to get me pre-emptivly upset at how stupid and insane the comment section is going to be.
pizzacake is a woman with opinions. misogynists hate her for that. One time, she didn't handle that very well. Lots of people got banned on reddit. Now people here mostly bitch about her comics being "low effort" and such, which mostly just reveals "I don't have a legit argument to hate this person so I'm going to pointlessly criticise her work instead."
As I've said in another comment, if some rando did the same scenario in ragemaker and posted it, everyone would be all over how relatable it is.
That said, it is possibly to simply not like the artstyle, or to not find the scenario relatable, or whatever criticism a person might have. Divorced of context, those criticisms sound valid. With context though, it becomes obvious that it is popular to persecute pizzacake.
Yes, there are some misogynists who hate pizzacake because she is a woman exercising her agency.
That is not the majority of pushback against her, just the most disgusting and vocal.
The vast majority of criticism of pizzacake is towards her lack of punchlines, constant strawmanning, the unbelievable sycophants who follow and worship her and have turned the relevant subreddit into basically /r/ChurchofPizzacake, and for pizzacake's pattern of poor behavior in interactions on reddit and elsewhere.
There is a lot of grossness surrounding the entire pizzacake topic, yes, that's undeniable. But to effectively chalk up all or most of the criticism as misogyny when a healthy majority of it sticks to the content of her comics or conduct in direct interactions rather than any extracurricular activities she may engage in, is just disingenuous as fuck.
I should clarify, I'm not claiming that everyone who is criticizing pizzacake is a misogynist. I am however saying that it is popular among misogynists to bully women artists and call it "criticism", thus, the presence of certain kinds of criticism indicates an increased likelihood that the "critic" is actually a misogynist, even if the criticisms at face value are legitimate.
I shouldn't need to have a law degree to write a comment in a comics forum.
The parallels are stark indeed. Divorced of context, it's perfectly reasonable to accept the argument that Rey is a poorly written character (because she is). Normal, well adjusted people were able to accept that the sequel trilogy sucks for numerous reasons, Rey being a poorly written character being one of them, and then move on. The problem with this criticism isn't the criticism itself, but rather the people who bang on and on and on about it reveal that they didn't have a problem with the writing, they had a problem with a female character having agency.
"Mind what people do, not just what they say, for deeds will betray a lie."
For some reason PCC:s supporters never mention that she threatened to sue a subreddit for making fun of her comics. "One time she didn't handle that very well" that's putting it very mildly. PC is just toxic
My dude, are you calling me a simp? I didn't know she had a patreon before today, and I wouldn't be a subscriber even if I did. There's infinite porn available for free. Everything I know about pizzacake is from the comment sections (and included links) of the last 3 times one of her comics made it into my feed. I have some basic reading and comprehension skills, so it's not hard for me to quickly see exactly what's going on here.
I fail to understand why posting a pair of tits is such a controversial thing to do
Pizzacake makes a lot of feminist leaning comics which heavily criticize the patriarchy, male objectification of women and "creepy" men who comment sexual things towards women.
In light of that, a lot of people find it hypocritical that she'd sell pictures of herself online for dudes to jerk off to when that's the exact opposite audience her comics tries to appeal to.
When the leak first happened, she presented the narrative as though her consent was violated and she was being sexually harassed by having private nudes released. When people found out that she was selling the photos publicy for money, suddenly it became aparent we werent talking about sexual abuse we were talking about piracy. It got a lot of people irritated for having been mislead, and then they started asking why the photos were there in the first place.
If she knows that she is the target of harassment campaigns, a lot of people are confused as to why she would post her nudes in a public space and not expect them to leak.
Given the fact she is a public figure who regularly makes comics out of her children, regularly gets doxxed and is targetted by hate, you would expect her to be a bit smarter about what she puts online. She's been online for years but seeks to lack basic understanding of cause and effect online (or else she understands it all too well and plays the victim perfectly to promote herself by baiting outrage incredibly effectively).
The part of it that bothers me personally is that there are kids involved and there is a 100% chance that all the kids at her son's school know and have looked up these nudes and her son probably gets bullied about it.
A "paragon of virtue" isΒ a person who is considered a perfect example of goodness and moral excellence.Β It implies they possess a high degree of admirable qualities like honesty, kindness, and justice, making them a role model of good character.Β The phrase is often used to describe someone who is perceived as flawless or exceptionally virtuous.
I never used this term sorry, I'm not sure what youβre reading.
She has children an online business so she has to be a paragon of virtue have basic OPSEC?
Yes, everyone should practice OPSEC, but a public "celebrity" who's sole business is online doubly so.
Operations securityΒ (OPSEC) is a process that identifies critical information to determine whether friendly actions can be observed by enemy intelligence, determines if information obtained by adversaries could be interpreted to be useful to them, and then executes selected measures that eliminate or reduce adversary exploitation of friendly critical information.
A parent should simply include their kids in the calculus.
She is a proud misandrist and a camgirl. Also the punchline of most of her comics is that impotent rage allows her to yell louder than any opinions she disagrees with.
That's her biggest platform by far, so I think what they said is fair game. Does Mastodon never talk about what happens on Twitter or BlueSky? The fact Reddit is a cesspool doesn't mean we should pretend it doesn't exist.
But we're not...? Someone just asked "what's the drama?" and someone matter-of-factly said what the drama is. What makes you think anything here is imitating Reddit?
Bringing pizzacake to Lemmy and not expecting her sycophants to follow is like stealing a block of cheese from a rat and not expecting it to follow you.
I'm here to tell you I just dislike the comic itself, I don't even know about any controversy. I see that shit, I close it and downvote. Nearly as bad as Family Circus.
I'm unfamiliar, this is the first thing of hers I've encountered and I thought it fun enough to post here. Is there one of those Reasons people don't like her?
There's a long story involving her threatening legal action against a subreddit over people parodying her work, overall she seems to be a very thin skinned individual that doesn't take criticism well.
Her work also just isn't very good, in my view. Her art style is incredibly bland, and her positions on various topics are just the biggest "no shit" moments you can imagine.
To be fair, if the biggest critiques of an internet celeb was that they were thin-skinned and their takes aren't very spicy then I take that as a win in today's environment. Hell even being "sort of an asshole" is pretty good by today's standards.
She's an example of a normal person becoming famous and having to navigate those waters without a team.
You're a wonderful example of an outside critic without consideration. I'm thankful I'm just a nobody like you, because these critiques upset me even when I'm not involved whatsoever.
You don't have to be an artist to criticize her, just like I don't have to be a critic to recognize bandwagoning. People shit on her because it's popular, not because of good reasons.
Continue to manifest reddit drama here, and argue for shitting on people. I'll take my downvotes for standing up for artists. There are literally hundreds of bigger problems we should be speaking up about, this comic artist is not one of them.
Maybe because the comics rarely have any substance to talk about. Besides, I don't want to see or support someone's work when they threaten people with litigation for making fun of and criticizing their comics
Same. I have no problem with her or her comics. But whenever I see one being posted, I sigh and ponder whether to open the clusterfuck that the comment section will be.
Maybe youre leaning more towards its a circlejerk? But I mean if its a circlejerk about disowning naxis and other annoying people I say pass the grease
It's something we already know, and it's said often enough that it's common knowledge.
Ok, capitalism is the root of most if not all of the evil in today's Western society, and that we'd all be better off without it.
I see this point of view expressed on Lemmy quite frequently.
Should I not share that even though it's been shared 10s, 100s, 1000s of times before? Do I as a participant in society have the freedom to voice what I believe, regardless of whether it's a majority or minority position?
Seems like you're advocating for silencing free speech, which is idiotic.
because some users on here are triggered by PCC and are dealing with feelings of inferiority and have contempt for an artist that refuses to put up with their bullshit.
Always crickets when it comes to legitimate criticism that doesn't align with their belief that the only reason anyone could ever possibly dislike pizzacake is because she's a woman.
I've only seen this artist reposted on lemmy and never knew the first thing about her other than her comics being pretty bland and art unimpressive despite being frequently posted, what is going on with all these people white knighting for her?? If you like her, cool. If you don't like her, also cool?? What is the problem here??
The closest thing to "harassing" I've witnessed is of those with fairly reasonable criticism of the comic presented to us, accusing them of harassing an artist that isn't even on this platform.
Can you give me a quick overview of the situation?
Do you remember when Star Wars Episode 7 came out and droves of people had very serious and legitimate criticisms of Rey being a Mary Sue not clearly motivated by Rey and Finn being women and black "DEI hires"? Because I do.
Harassment is a bit more complicated than whether the criticisms seem legitimate or not. Another example: "forced bussing" was an argument republicans invented years ago to appeal to racists who were no longer allowed to say the n-word publically. But that argument was really about "safety," of course, obviously.
What does this have to do with Pizzacake? I dunno. I do know that posting a comic of hers is a remarkably effective way of getting lemmy's beehive to start buzzing.
Is it? I've never seen this before and seen lots of this artist's comics posted here. It does seem it's just as much one side as it is the other though.
Also I understand the concept of fear mongering veiled bigotry. That doesn't even remotely appear to be what is happening here and, not to be overly pearl clutch-y, but as somebody with intimate knowledge of this history I honestly find the comparison to the civil rights era insulting. People expressing their dislike of an artist with questionable behavior on the internet is not the same thing as politicians in the real world using fear tactics as a fig leaf for their racist goals of preventing black people from fully integrating into american society.
I understand you mean well but this doesn't really answer for me why the defensiveness is so over the top.
Does your intimate knowledge of the civil rights era include how people use issues in euphemism to lie about what actually motivates them? You know, the whole reason I even brought up that example.
I've never seen this before
That doesn't even remotely appear to be what is happening here
Okay, realize for a moment that the fig leaf strategy is specifically meant to capture people like you. I know it doesn't seem that way; that's the point of them hiding their intent. I'm not critiquing their points, I'm asking why they're spending so much energy on this. I've seen lots of comics I don't like. I scroll past them.
Here's a question: Gamergate. Was Anita Sarkeesian really that bad a journalist? Or did people hyper-fixate on her shortcomings for months longer than necessary as a way of damaging the reputations of her and feminism broadly?
You and I both know now, today, that gamergate was bullshit. But did peopleβmaybe you're very special, but I don't mean you, I mean peopleβknow back then that "ethics in games journalism" is not really what those people were upset about? Because I don't know if you remember, but gamergate was pretty popular for a while.
this doesn't really answer for me why the defensiveness is so over the top
I think they're attacking a woman they don't like. That's in the subtext of my other comment.
Uh, they spent the small amount of energy it takes to leave a few comments on the internet because the same painfully unfunny comic strip keeps coming up in their feed and they don't understand where the popularity comes from? That's why I'm here at least. Lemmy is still relatively small, I don't get that many posts to interact with. If it's so much energy to spend, then I'm fundamentally asking the same question as you. Why are these people spending so much of their energy defending her?
I don't see why it has to be anything more than that and I really don't appreciate the condescension, to suggest that I've fallen for some rhetorical manipulation that you think you're somehow immune from. Yes, I was also here on the internet when those things were happening. It's not that I don't understand it, it's that this is not that. There are legitimate reasons to dislike this person and their comics.
Do you really think that being annoying like this; suggesting that any and all criticism towards any woman on the internet simply must be based on her gender; is going to dispel negative attention from actual sexists? Do you really think that you aren't gonna get a lot of false positives, from people simply expressing their legitimate criticisms on a platform specifically made for the purpose, and push those people away from whatever your message is by presuming to know what they are thinking and aggressively using that to condescend to them and dismiss anything they have to say?
Also yes, it was very obvious even to the least politically engaged person that gamergate was about sexism. Yes, even as it was happening. That's like the whole reason people took part in it. They knew what they were doing just as well as the people calling them on it and were pretty open about their sexism. They weren't career politicians trying to pander to a racist base without sparking major backlash, so they could quietly pass laws to prevent integration; they were gamers having their little boys club on the internet, being flagrantly sexist and bad faith. What even is this line of reasoning??
If you like this person as an artist and identify with the comic you can just say that and engage normally, if you don't then why would you go out of your way to defend them and suggest that their gender has anything to do with it? You don't have to keep explaining the same point, I know what you're saying and I disagree.
Yeah and it goes both ways. She can post her crap, and haters can hate. She can ignore them and they choose not to ignore her. That's where the conflict comes in.
The whole DMCA thing only made it worse. She exposed herself as a target for hatred and the haters love nothing more than for the enemy to expose their glowing weak point to shoot at.
But that's because if we want copyright and parody to coexist, they need to have limits. Parody gets a blanket license to reuse source material endlessly unless you can justify the expense of an attorney to hit a moving target that may be made from hundreds of individuals mocking your content. That's kind of shitty and almost impossible to defend against. It's like how you can't copyright a tweet because it is too short. But you should be able to copyright a body of tweets because aggregated they are (checks notes) not too short. In her case the bonehurtingjuice community turned into an active troll campaign to target every one of her comics to harass and demean her.
So in this case I do think the internet trolls on bhj were shitheads and were in the wrong. Even if that coexists with my opinion that her comics kind of suck. And frankly I think the current legal system is at fault for not having adapted to coordinated trolling. She's probably going to get killed by one of those gamergate nutjobs now that she's been doxxed.
The issue with doxxing that really frustrates me as a coder is that individual developers and companies are never held responsible for making negligently insecure software.
I've never blocked anyone. 14 years of reddit and now Lemmy and there has never been a reason to. I find it weird when people do it.
I get it if someone is harrasing you, but an anonymous disagreement? Meh, whatever. If I am done I just quit responding and move on.
I suppose being online since the 80's gives you a little bit of perspective. Don't feed the trolls, everyone is a liar, and nothing anyone says matters unless you want it to.
I have seen people have some obnoxious weird idea about one thing and be brilliant about another. Not everyone, some are just trolls, but some people are really. Good at something interesting and have stupid ideas about others.
I am not so quick to just write everyone off, but I also find it easy to just not read things I don't care about.
There's a couple I've blocked, because they're simply incapable of having any type of discussion unless you're rabidly in agreement with them, and they immediately turn to insulting anyone who disagrees.
If you never had to block anyone, you might be in a more lucky spot. Just because you don't have or see a problem, does not mean the problem does not exist. Just a reminder.
It's the same as with racism, for example. If you're not part of a minority, or hide it well enough, you don't see the racism.
None of us want Lemmy to be a Nazi bar, right? So if we see a Nazi on here and all of us block them today, they can circlejerk in a comment tomorrow and a newly registered user will see no one downvoted them or called them out.*
As a privileged person, I feel an obligation not to block anyone, and even feel Iβm abdicating my duty a little by not browsing logged out sometimes to make sure Nazis canβt block me and spread hate without counterpoints lodged against them.
*would a βwidely-blocked userβ tag help? Not if they create a new account after every other post, & scummy users could mitigate by proactively blocking using βSJW userβ lists, but itβs an idea
Yeah, same here. I just don't see the need to block people. Some might have a different opinion on one topic than me, but be no in agreement or have something worthwile to say on another.
If I was activly harassed or anything, I'd use the block function to protect myself from that. Never had to do that so far.
Anybody who immediatelly starts insulting others gets blocked.
I'm not interested in watching somebody's public self-masturbation shows: insulting others achieves nothing but give those doing the insulting the pleasure of thinking that they're hurting others - it won't convince the person they're replying to and it won't convince the audience (since an insult is as much an argument for a viewpoint as a punching somebody's face), so directly insulting random strangers is only for the pleasure of those doing it.
Further, people whose default reaction to disagreeing with others is to try and hurt them don't really deserve any of my time.
Being deep down in an argument, losing one's patience and ending up throwing insults is one thing, just being obnoxious and insulting from the get go is something else altogether and betrays a very different kind of character, one that there is no point in listening to.
You have to read some of it until you get to the insults and mentally go "Oh, it's one of those", unless you have a mental list of usernames for those people in Lemmy (in all fairness, they're very few) or use an interface were you can tag users and see the tags (but tagging or blocking is about the same amount of work).
The only weirdo I know that blocks people left and right is one that signs every comment with a "no AI license" thingy. Anyone that correctly comments how that's useless/pointless because bots ignore that is blocked
Honestly I've come around on pizzacake. I now think it's actually an impressive artistic feat to make a successful webcomic where your secondary main character is consistently a non-existent strawman.
It's like social commentary on social commentary, wrapped in countless layers of irony and meta, right?
Every time I see this comic I think "you totally had a confrontation you fumbled, then came up with a response a week later and made a comic to 'own' someone".
I also just generally like the Mary Sue nature of drawing yourself into your own comics and making yourself look good under all circumstances. It really communicates a lack of narcissism and arrogance.
your secondary main character is consistently a non-existent strawman
Y'all gonna pretend the person in the comic isn't real? I've seen comments of that exact nature discussing people who block others before bruh, find a legitimate comic to post this on next time
That's fair criticism. In the comic at hand, you're right, they're not a non-existent strawman, as this strawman does exist. The apt critique for this specific comic is more about how blaringly obvious the conclusion that is being presented as revelatory is, so I shouldn't have used the word "non-existent" in this specific critique. Very fair, cheers.
Well, same way Stormtroopers wear helmets. You canβt really individualize them or people start to appreciate them and root for them, like they do every villain.
Pot/Kettle much? You haven't even engaged with my criticism, since I never once have called pizzacake's comics either "crazy" or "irrelevant" or any synonym thereof; if anything they're too pedestrian and "low-hanging fruit," the exact opposite of those critiques.
And you see, this right here is why some of us don't want pizzacake's bullshit here; it is seemingly impossible for people to engage with criticism of them honestly, for some unknown reason.
I have never once sought out a pizzacake comic to shit on. I have never once criticized pizzacake for anything outside the content of the art she has personally entered into the public square or her conduct in relation to said art. All I have ever done is engage with the art brought into the public square for consideration. This is c/comicstrips, not c/comicstripsycophantry, ostensibly a community for the discussion and consideration of this media form, not just a place for empty yes-manning.
So as for you, feel free to take your own advice and just block me if you find my content distasteful, but as for your assertion, you can kindly fuck right off with that.
You aren't even using that term right; I'm not asking for you to engage me in shit, nor am I feigning civility as I've been pretty clearly aggressive in my stance and told you to fuck off. Again, enormous pot/kettle projection. But hey, I'll save us both the trouble and do the blocking for you. π
I'm not even sure this counts as drama. These people are addicted to wallowing in negativity. Gives me r/questionablecontent vibes, a subreddit about a webcomic where people purport to hate it but continue reading it every day just so they can get mad about it.
Like, I strongly dislike the Far Side, but despite how frequently it gets upvoted I don't go into every comment section to talk about why. I just blocked the sub and scroll past it when it shows up in other subs. The behavior in these threads is pathetic.
The art is awful and the jokes are either literal nonsense or annoyingly simple. Same kinda stuff being said in this thread. Same reasons anyone dislikes a comic. Just doesn't resonate. I can't say why people decide some stupid shit works for them and other stupid shit doesn't.
I haven't been reading it in years, but even back then there were multiple gay/lesbian main characters. The subject of ai civil rights (obvious minority allegory) was a somewhat frequent topic. I vaguely remember there being a couple pages dedicated to how the human/machine war never happened because a couple researchers decided not to be dicks to their freshly spawned ai and instead treated it with compassion and empathy.
the comic was always woke, we just didn't have a monosyllabic word for it back then.
At the start it was pretty hetero and white, IIRC. Dora might always have been bisexual, but it's easier to ignore if it's an informed trait rather than something that's actually visible. But I think the big giveaway that it was never going to go where rightwingers would want it is the way the main character interacted with these people.
I can't really make an argument against that, considering that I stopped reading it years ago. Although I'll deflect blame and say that was due to my rss reader of choice being killed (google reader), so I stopped reading webcomics in general about that time.
I can understand why people might not like it. In effect, it's a sitcom with a gimmick, and there's tons of those on television (I actively despise all of them). I'll defend questionable content though because it has a setting and cast of characters that I've become invested in. However, I can see what it is, and I understand that it's not for everyone.
However, however, CONTEXT, specifically this conversation. People are allegedly hating on Jeph Jacques over on /r/questionablecontent just as hard as people are hating on pzzacake here. And to that I reiterate: fucking why?
Just looked at the comic for the first time in years, and I am massively impressed by how his artistic skills have improved. Look at the current page vs page 1. If I didn't know better, I would not believe that it was done by the same person.
Maybe people just got sick of seeing it posted? I'd never actively seek out a Pizzacake comic, but I do point out the many shortcomings when they show up here.
They could have blocked the sub instead of commenting every day and harassing the separate QC-sub that actually liked the comic. In contrast to Lemmy, on Reddit it's actually really easy to block comics you don't like, because they were usually posted to their own subs (and possibly even by a separate user, sometimes even the creator themselves like the Extra Fabulous guy) instead of a general sub/community like c/comicstrips.
As a leftist, as a progressive, I long for a world where I never have to see these comics again. It's not that I disagree with them, they're just so goddamn annoying and low hanging fruit shit
If some rando did this exact scenario in ragemaker and posted it, with no connection to pizzacake, everyone would be talking about how relatable it is. I'd wager you'd be included in that 'everyone'.
Well that's kind of the point. It's low hanging fruit because everyone agrees with it. No one thinks you are obligated to argue with others, which is the straw man's position. It's not that you don't have a right to block critics, the question is "When is it a good idea?".
It sounds like a lot of people think the author does it too liberally, which can lead to an echo chamber. Most people would say creating a lawsuit against your critics is also an overreaction, but people have also been saying she gets harassed a lot. That makes it more reasonable if true.
So I'm fully expecting a big reaction given how much of a reaction this comic always provokes, I'm not a huge fan of pizzacake's art style or the whole negativity around it but I also haven't found a way to just filter it out without blocking the whole instance. I'm not attacking anyone though, you keep on enjoying this if you like, I'm just putting my thoughts out and I might just be missing an option.
No, not at all. I'm just saying that you're putting unnecessary restraint on yourself. It MIGHT also be detrimental because a lot of people will avoid the post because they don't want to see, idk, boob or vageen or peen or a plate of broccoli (because they're in public). But that's your decision.
It doesn't feel like restraint to me, just an extra note for the benefit of anyone who happens to be at a workplace like mine where a big expletive on the screen might not be the best thing when the boss walks by. I do appreciate your perspective, though.
I mean, this text is, what, a few centimillimetres tall at best, I wouldn't be able to read that "bullshit" without lurking on your shoulder. If your boss watches what you read that closely, you maybe shouldn't be on Lemmy at work, no?
... or maybe you use absolutely massive screens at work. Like, billboard size? I want that job. π
What job do you have where your boss would care and you would get in trouble for the word "Fuck" appearing on your screen where you wouldn't get in trouble for just browsing Lemmy in general?
This has always felt like a solution in search of a problem to me.
Using flags such as NSFW on non-NSFW posts devalues the flag, which means that next time I might actually unblur something when I shouldn't have because I assumed it was an incorrect flagging.
Hey, why are you simping for the corporate takeover of the internet? Self-censoring in fear that the big bad Google or Meta will get mad at your no-no words and take them down. Fuck them. They are trying to sanitize the internet to make it more appealing for ads. Don't help them.
.......you can fucking curse on the fucking internet, asshole! What fucking kind of shitty bullshit do you think will happen if you piss off some cocksucking dickhead by saying shit?
Here, I'm going to do this shit for you. Just for you, I'm going to curse for you on the god damned internet. Get ready for this shit. Are you ready for me to fucking curse? Ok. Here we go!
ok sure but that doesn't mean it's appropriate for all people in all situations. you'll notice that they did, in fact still post it - they didn't censor it. they just tagged it NSFW.
there's been plenty of times when I'm bored at work, and could totally get away with browsing whatever on lemmy; but I don't feel like having a conversation with HR because someone walks by my desk. I'd much rather know there's something here that might offend someone (even if it doesn't offend me, or you personally for that matter).
You can curse online if you want to! You can curse at your friends online! Because friends all curse, and if they don't curse, well they're no friends of mine!
Holy fucking shit, did you just fucking curse on the internet. Eveyone know you cant fucking do that without the internet police coming to your home to beat your ass. Never fucking do that again you shit
Nobody is changing their mind from modern debates online. We are in a culture of anti-intellectualism. So there really is no point. I only block if someone is annoying or there is no point in engagement.
It's really crazy how internet regressed in this regard. "Don't feed the troll" is been the moto of the web but not it's almost inverse. People try to justify this as justice seeking but its clearly doesn't work.
Man all get comics these days seem to be mostly about people bothering her online. I get the desire to vent that frustration but it's been a while since I've seen anything else.
People I block don't deserve my energy more like. In social media sites that differentiate between blocking and muting I usually mute because they might learn something from me.
I block people mostly because I don't want to upvote anything they have to say in the future. Usually because something they have said to me or someone else is so egregious that I don't care to know what else they might say.
The other reason comes down to harassment, or deliberate misuse of tags.
Ironic considering she could've just blocked the subreddit that made fun of her work instead of threatening to sue them. But hey, that's toxic people for you.
Would the same anti-block people be okay with people showing up to their house, job, or on the street to argue about some stupid point? Why is it okay on social media? You have the right to tell people to go fuck off, it's called the 1st amendment.
I'd frame it more as 'a comic artist is not spreading normative ideas. They're just using the ideas people already have and juxtaposing them to get a laugh. They aren't there for debate because no one should be taking a comic artist's ideas that seriously. e.g. Dilbert guy'
Double benefit from my perspective. I block people for three reasons, they are not mutually exclusive. Willful stupidity and being argumentative. If someone refuses to learn objective truth or insists I believe their objectively wrong position I have no need to interact with them in the future. Iβm done with them. The third reason is getting the last word, myself or them. I have a hard time shutting up sometimes, so if someone meets either of the above criterial and has to continue to keep commenting on any rebuttal I make I just block them. Thereβs no reason to allow myself to continue the interaction, and the other person has no interest in a good faith discussion.
i block rude and hateful people, itβs gotten bad on Lemmy recently but you can disagree with someoneβs point while agreeing with their overall belief system, in the most normal way and you get back name calling, hateful comments, lots of anger by people just waiting to throw shit at someone for anything.
Used to be you could have a group of people who agree on a subject but not the execution, and you could have a discussion, now if your view doesnβt conform 100% you get treated like youβre garbage.
Really its the same as meatspace. You don't hang with folks you don't like or take phone calls from them. My dream is a block thats symetrical. Blocking is in some ways creepy because its only one way.
I don't give a damn about your argument, you're taking the web too serious. That's why i block yo ass because if you stopped being annoying i would just ignore you.
But alas you got nothing better to do, so it's a block.
Every block enforced your echo chamber, brick by brick.
This is why i don't block things in general. How could I possibly have the slightest bit of nuanced idea of what other people talk about, if i just block it?
Just kidding. Debate is good, but unfortunately some of them is done in bad faith, either just for trolling, or because the oposing side just has no intention of even considering your arguments.
In both case, blocking is justified.
I tend to steer clear of online debate, i just want to see what is being written so that I don't get a skewed view.
The only way to avoid the echo chamber is likely not participating in social media at all.
If I have the energy for it, I browse some classical forums, where you have to go through every reply. Kind of tedious, but atleast every post gets the same "weight".
I block people very rarely (I think I have just two or three blocks on Lemmy and Mastodon combined) but when I do it's because of tone, not because of content. I'm fine with reading things I don't agree with or that I think are disconnected from reality. As you say, it gives you an idea of what others think. But if someone is needlessly and consistently rude, I just don't need that in my life.
Never said that. I said I rarely block people in general, not that there are few trolls.
But sure, if you want to increase the size of my block list, calling my post "some bs" just because my experience is different from yours is probably a good start. Let's see if I'll stick around long enough to get so annoyed that I need to block you or if I just walk away.
I'm with you, to a degree. If I see someone clearly acting in bad faith and/or trolling, then they are just wasting my time.
However, if we have a disagreement of opinion, I don't feel right about blocking that someone. This would lead to a lonely existence, because the odds of having someone that agrees with every single one of my opinions is pretty low, so that means over time, I'd have blocked everyone.
Because you read (past tense) it before you blocked it?
That's the whole point. I don't want a "past tense" understanding of what is being said and written by "people".
Obviously spammers get blocked, cause they make it hard to read. The rest are just words and opinions. All of which I'm perfectly capable of dealing with.
Devils advocate hat ON: I recon they feel the same way about you. What's the play? Just ignore them while they take over your country? Do you think that you can solve the problem without infringing on peoples right to listen to whatever they want?
This would be true if exactly the two people are involved but after that you are not the only one affected, also who is to say they are a troll or have a valid opinion? If it is an individual then that is definitionally a totalitarian.
Sure, in a wildly extreme version of it and only when the goverment does it. So, basically not at all.
Many of the people who demand βdebateβ have no real interest in engaging properly, they just want to spew their shit without consequence. People are getting really tired of it and having to constantly do the legwork for them since theyβre not even willing to try a little bit or even learn when obvious facts are presented in their little βdebatesβ.
First things first, what is a government? Because many corporations have more soft and hard power than the majority of all governments through history, the same can be said about certain influencers, is it simply the Monopoly on violence? Because that seems awfully arbitrary and means any bully is a government, I would argue the principal behind it is far more important than some arbitrary definition of government that even international bodies don't agree on.
Second thing second, sure, many, people argue in bad faith, many are improper many are etc but certainly not all and certainly not every influencer or company should be the absolute arbiter of Truth and moral.
It is just a comic, just like trump is just joking about Tariffs and infact the very idea of him ever getting elected is a meme and a joke, or the Flat Earth theory, that is sooooo funny, or how about the Tide Pod challenge, wasn't that funny????????? Or remember all that time ago when school shootings were a Joke? Wasn't that sooooooooo funny ???? π€£ππ€£π€£π€£
It does mean people have the right to hear, and When high profile people are able to censor it is taking away from the open market of ideas as much as any government, sure, you specifically do not have to argue anything, and I am ok with that but it is a fine line to censorship, including for other political powers or corporations, it happens in real life with real influencers all the time.
I don't mind pizzacake commics, but at this point just seeing the art style is enough to get me pre-emptivly upset at how stupid and insane the comment section is going to be.
I see it and just sigh because I know nobody will talk about the actual comic it will just be about how shitty of a person she is for X reason.
Iβm out of the loop, whatβs the pizza cake drama?
pizzacake is a woman with opinions. misogynists hate her for that. One time, she didn't handle that very well. Lots of people got banned on reddit. Now people here mostly bitch about her comics being "low effort" and such, which mostly just reveals "I don't have a legit argument to hate this person so I'm going to pointlessly criticise her work instead."
As I've said in another comment, if some rando did the same scenario in ragemaker and posted it, everyone would be all over how relatable it is.
That said, it is possibly to simply not like the artstyle, or to not find the scenario relatable, or whatever criticism a person might have. Divorced of context, those criticisms sound valid. With context though, it becomes obvious that it is popular to persecute pizzacake.
Y'all have got to join us in reality.
Yes, there are some misogynists who hate pizzacake because she is a woman exercising her agency.
That is not the majority of pushback against her, just the most disgusting and vocal.
The vast majority of criticism of pizzacake is towards her lack of punchlines, constant strawmanning, the unbelievable sycophants who follow and worship her and have turned the relevant subreddit into basically /r/ChurchofPizzacake, and for pizzacake's pattern of poor behavior in interactions on reddit and elsewhere.
There is a lot of grossness surrounding the entire pizzacake topic, yes, that's undeniable. But to effectively chalk up all or most of the criticism as misogyny when a healthy majority of it sticks to the content of her comics or conduct in direct interactions rather than any extracurricular activities she may engage in, is just disingenuous as fuck.
I should clarify, I'm not claiming that everyone who is criticizing pizzacake is a misogynist. I am however saying that it is popular among misogynists to bully women artists and call it "criticism", thus, the presence of certain kinds of criticism indicates an increased likelihood that the "critic" is actually a misogynist, even if the criticisms at face value are legitimate.
I shouldn't need to have a law degree to write a comment in a comics forum.
Ah, I remember having these arguments about whether Star Wars 7 should have let Rey be a woman. Uh, I mean, a Mary Sue.
The parallels are stark indeed. Divorced of context, it's perfectly reasonable to accept the argument that Rey is a poorly written character (because she is). Normal, well adjusted people were able to accept that the sequel trilogy sucks for numerous reasons, Rey being a poorly written character being one of them, and then move on. The problem with this criticism isn't the criticism itself, but rather the people who bang on and on and on about it reveal that they didn't have a problem with the writing, they had a problem with a female character having agency.
"Mind what people do, not just what they say, for deeds will betray a lie."
I'm not on Reddit, I don't care what the subreddit is like.
fans of [thing] are on the subreddit of [thing] saying how much they like [thing]?! I guess I should hate everything then!
Your grasping at straws here man.
For some reason PCC:s supporters never mention that she threatened to sue a subreddit for making fun of her comics. "One time she didn't handle that very well" that's putting it very mildly. PC is just toxic
Is that what the narrative is now? I think the critics would have mentioned it last time, they were very thorough and even cited sources.
I didn't know who she was or her gender when I said I hate her art style is almost as much as Ben Garrison's.
I only hear about her onlyfans from people who don't like her because she has an onlyfans. You advertise more than she does.
She has an only fans??! o.O zomg
Thanks lemmy566567 for letting me know! I'll check it out right now!
Which tier of her patron do you subscribe to?
My dude, are you calling me a simp? I didn't know she had a patreon before today, and I wouldn't be a subscriber even if I did. There's infinite porn available for free. Everything I know about pizzacake is from the comment sections (and included links) of the last 3 times one of her comics made it into my feed. I have some basic reading and comprehension skills, so it's not hard for me to quickly see exactly what's going on here.
Iβm not your dude, guy.
My apologies for calling you a dude against your will.
Also, Guy is my father, but that's besides the point.
The rest of my comment still stands.
All I know is she posts lewds to her Patreon and has lots of simps
I fail to understand why posting a pair of tits is such a controversial thing to do. Maybe I'm too European to lose my marbles over some nipples.
Pizzacake makes a lot of feminist leaning comics which heavily criticize the patriarchy, male objectification of women and "creepy" men who comment sexual things towards women.
In light of that, a lot of people find it hypocritical that she'd sell pictures of herself online for dudes to jerk off to when that's the exact opposite audience her comics tries to appeal to.
When the leak first happened, she presented the narrative as though her consent was violated and she was being sexually harassed by having private nudes released. When people found out that she was selling the photos publicy for money, suddenly it became aparent we werent talking about sexual abuse we were talking about piracy. It got a lot of people irritated for having been mislead, and then they started asking why the photos were there in the first place.
If she knows that she is the target of harassment campaigns, a lot of people are confused as to why she would post her nudes in a public space and not expect them to leak.
Given the fact she is a public figure who regularly makes comics out of her children, regularly gets doxxed and is targetted by hate, you would expect her to be a bit smarter about what she puts online. She's been online for years but seeks to lack basic understanding of cause and effect online (or else she understands it all too well and plays the victim perfectly to promote herself by baiting outrage incredibly effectively).
The part of it that bothers me personally is that there are kids involved and there is a 100% chance that all the kids at her son's school know and have looked up these nudes and her son probably gets bullied about it.
She has children so she has to be a paragon of virtue?
What?
I never used this term sorry, I'm not sure what youβre reading.
Yes, everyone should practice OPSEC, but a public "celebrity" who's sole business is online doubly so.
A parent should simply include their kids in the calculus.
Like the green knight, for example.
She is a proud misandrist and a camgirl. Also the punchline of most of her comics is that impotent rage allows her to yell louder than any opinions she disagrees with.
her comics are
midmediocre and you will catch a ban if you say that in r/comicsI wasn't aware we're bringing Reddit dramas to fester on Lemmy
That's her biggest platform by far, so I think what they said is fair game. Does Mastodon never talk about what happens on Twitter or BlueSky? The fact Reddit is a cesspool doesn't mean we should pretend it doesn't exist.
It doesn't mean we should imitate them either
But we're not...? Someone just asked "what's the drama?" and someone matter-of-factly said what the drama is. What makes you think anything here is imitating Reddit?
Bringing pizzacake to Lemmy and not expecting her sycophants to follow is like stealing a block of cheese from a rat and not expecting it to follow you.
I'll try not to let it happen again.
To be fair βyour comic sucksβ is kind of a dickish thing to comment.
Excuse me, I thought mid meant something along the lines of mediocre, not suck.
And you were correct
Iβm being hyperbolic.
OK. I'm not being hyperbolic.
It does.
It does and doesn't.
It means 'middle', but to be 'middle' in a world of greats is to be lame and worth very little.
Think about it this way: when someone says something sucks, no one ever corrects them "nah, it's mid," like in a positive way.
It wasn't intended to be either a slight or a compliment.
If you ain't first, you're last? Nah. That don't make no sense.
https://youtu.be/20iio0wLpPA
Its kind of a dick move to start writing hate comments under a comic that you find mildy displeasing.
Yeah, if you have like.. actual constructive feedback go for it, but βthis is mid/low effortβ really isnβt helpful
Yeah, I agree.
I'm here to tell you I just dislike the comic itself, I don't even know about any controversy. I see that shit, I close it and downvote. Nearly as bad as Family Circus.
Don't know what family circus is but yeah I don't really like her comics and would much rather discuss why instead of talking about the unrelated BS.
It's hugely popular but I find the humor inane and it seemed like every other one was a blatant propaganda post.
I'm unfamiliar, this is the first thing of hers I've encountered and I thought it fun enough to post here. Is there one of those Reasons people don't like her?
There's a long story involving her threatening legal action against a subreddit over people parodying her work, overall she seems to be a very thin skinned individual that doesn't take criticism well.
Her work also just isn't very good, in my view. Her art style is incredibly bland, and her positions on various topics are just the biggest "no shit" moments you can imagine.
To be fair, if the biggest critiques of an internet celeb was that they were thin-skinned and their takes aren't very spicy then I take that as a win in today's environment. Hell even being "sort of an asshole" is pretty good by today's standards.
It could be worse, but then again, people wouldn't be posting her work all the time if she'd done something truly awful.
Instead she makes bland dross that confirms people's opinions, and people think she's actually creative as a result.
She does, however, sell nude pictures on her patron.
Lol of course it would be satansmaggotycumfart to share this tidbit
Gentlemen, I think I've found my next job. Now, if only I was good looking...
You could always paint your toenails and sell foot pics.
I mean.....I wouldn't know......
π€
I'd have to shave my feet and get a pedicure as well, since I don't think there is much of a market for male hobbit feet
Thanks, SatansMaggotyCumFart. You've shown us the audience that shits on artists
I honestly donβt think sheβs into that.
We won't know unless we ask though
It's not like the community here shits on all artists regularly, it's just the one.
Bullying someone because everyone else does it still doesn't make it cool dude
Which is very weird, but whatever.
She's an example of a normal person becoming famous and having to navigate those waters without a team.
You're a wonderful example of an outside critic without consideration. I'm thankful I'm just a nobody like you, because these critiques upset me even when I'm not involved whatsoever.
I wasn't aware I had to be an artist to criticise Pizzacake.
And even without the drama on Reddit, which I don't particularly care about, her work is extremely bland and unimaginative.
Lots of posts on Lemmy are bland and unimaginative. I don't feel the need to comment as such in each and every one of them.
You do you, I guess.
You don't have to be an artist to criticize her, just like I don't have to be a critic to recognize bandwagoning. People shit on her because it's popular, not because of good reasons.
Continue to manifest reddit drama here, and argue for shitting on people. I'll take my downvotes for standing up for artists. There are literally hundreds of bigger problems we should be speaking up about, this comic artist is not one of them.
Have you considered the possibility everyone is criticising her because she genuinely sucks?
posts nude photos of Nurse_Robot punting a basket of puppies
You swore you'd never post that photo, I only kicked that basket because you said it was the only way you could get off
Yeah. I recommend a drink.
That's not true, we also insult her half assed art style and middle of the road takes.
Case in point.
They're literally criticizing the content of the comics and not her person, it's the exact opposite of "case in point"
Maybe because the comics rarely have any substance to talk about. Besides, I don't want to see or support someone's work when they threaten people with litigation for making fun of and criticizing their comics
Same. I have no problem with her or her comics. But whenever I see one being posted, I sigh and ponder whether to open the clusterfuck that the comment section will be.
take it from someone who knew better and did it anyway, don't engage the clusterfuck.
That's why I blocked her.
"why did you block me we're trying to have a debate"
"because i want to shitpost about doctor who on twitter not debate some random dick about how they think i shouldn't exist"
As obvious and uncontroversial as this comic may seem, the message still needs to be said.
No it doesn't, because this shit is just ragebait.
How? It says nothing rageworthy
Uh... to whom?
I really don't think it does.
Care to elaborate? Or are we edging βI just donβt like that my opinion is bad and people have the right to tell me fuck offβ?
It's something we already know, and it's said often enough that it's common knowledge.
Like I said in another comment, most of her comics I react to with a "no shit". She's stating the obvious.
"Commom Knowledge" isn't comon among a LOT of idiots this comic is aimed at.
Assuming it was common knowledge to don't be a nazi is how we got all these nazis running around
Exactly
I really hope these comics don't surge here like they did on reddit. It's not wrong, it's just such low effort. Its just pandering.
Maybe youre leaning more towards its a circlejerk? But I mean if its a circlejerk about disowning naxis and other annoying people I say pass the grease
Circlejerk, preaching to the choir, stating the obvious, whatever you want to call it.
Ok, capitalism is the root of most if not all of the evil in today's Western society, and that we'd all be better off without it.
I see this point of view expressed on Lemmy quite frequently.
Should I not share that even though it's been shared 10s, 100s, 1000s of times before? Do I as a participant in society have the freedom to voice what I believe, regardless of whether it's a majority or minority position?
Seems like you're advocating for silencing free speech, which is idiotic.
And you saying that is why it does need to be said.
It needs to be said because someone thinks it doesn't need to be said? That doesn't make sense.
You're really going to town in here, aren't you?
Eh, kinda
Why is this marked as nsfw?
because some users on here are triggered by PCC and are dealing with feelings of inferiority and have contempt for an artist that refuses to put up with their bullshit.
ironically, it's pretty much this comic.
Or people don't want to see stuff from someone who threatens people with litigation for making fun of their comics
Always crickets when it comes to legitimate criticism that doesn't align with their belief that the only reason anyone could ever possibly dislike pizzacake is because she's a woman.
I've only seen this artist reposted on lemmy and never knew the first thing about her other than her comics being pretty bland and art unimpressive despite being frequently posted, what is going on with all these people white knighting for her?? If you like her, cool. If you don't like her, also cool?? What is the problem here??
The closest thing to "harassing" I've witnessed is of those with fairly reasonable criticism of the comic presented to us, accusing them of harassing an artist that isn't even on this platform.
Can you give me a quick overview of the situation?
Do you remember when Star Wars Episode 7 came out and droves of people had very serious and legitimate criticisms of Rey being a Mary Sue not clearly motivated by Rey and Finn being women and black "DEI hires"? Because I do.
Harassment is a bit more complicated than whether the criticisms seem legitimate or not. Another example: "forced bussing" was an argument republicans invented years ago to appeal to racists who were no longer allowed to say the n-word publically. But that argument was really about "safety," of course, obviously.
What does this have to do with Pizzacake? I dunno. I do know that posting a comic of hers is a remarkably effective way of getting lemmy's beehive to start buzzing.
Is it? I've never seen this before and seen lots of this artist's comics posted here. It does seem it's just as much one side as it is the other though.
Also I understand the concept of
fear mongeringveiled bigotry. That doesn't even remotely appear to be what is happening here and, not to be overly pearl clutch-y, but as somebody with intimate knowledge of this history I honestly find the comparison to the civil rights era insulting. People expressing their dislike of an artist with questionable behavior on the internet is not the same thing as politicians in the real world using fear tactics as a fig leaf for their racist goals of preventing black people from fully integrating into american society.I understand you mean well but this doesn't really answer for me why the defensiveness is so over the top.
Does your intimate knowledge of the civil rights era include how people use issues in euphemism to lie about what actually motivates them? You know, the whole reason I even brought up that example.
Okay, realize for a moment that the fig leaf strategy is specifically meant to capture people like you. I know it doesn't seem that way; that's the point of them hiding their intent. I'm not critiquing their points, I'm asking why they're spending so much energy on this. I've seen lots of comics I don't like. I scroll past them.
Here's a question: Gamergate. Was Anita Sarkeesian really that bad a journalist? Or did people hyper-fixate on her shortcomings for months longer than necessary as a way of damaging the reputations of her and feminism broadly?
You and I both know now, today, that gamergate was bullshit. But did peopleβmaybe you're very special, but I don't mean you, I mean peopleβknow back then that "ethics in games journalism" is not really what those people were upset about? Because I don't know if you remember, but gamergate was pretty popular for a while.
I think they're attacking a woman they don't like. That's in the subtext of my other comment.
Uh, they spent the small amount of energy it takes to leave a few comments on the internet because the same painfully unfunny comic strip keeps coming up in their feed and they don't understand where the popularity comes from? That's why I'm here at least. Lemmy is still relatively small, I don't get that many posts to interact with. If it's so much energy to spend, then I'm fundamentally asking the same question as you. Why are these people spending so much of their energy defending her?
I don't see why it has to be anything more than that and I really don't appreciate the condescension, to suggest that I've fallen for some rhetorical manipulation that you think you're somehow immune from. Yes, I was also here on the internet when those things were happening. It's not that I don't understand it, it's that this is not that. There are legitimate reasons to dislike this person and their comics.
Do you really think that being annoying like this; suggesting that any and all criticism towards any woman on the internet simply must be based on her gender; is going to dispel negative attention from actual sexists? Do you really think that you aren't gonna get a lot of false positives, from people simply expressing their legitimate criticisms on a platform specifically made for the purpose, and push those people away from whatever your message is by presuming to know what they are thinking and aggressively using that to condescend to them and dismiss anything they have to say?
Also yes, it was very obvious even to the least politically engaged person that gamergate was about sexism. Yes, even as it was happening. That's like the whole reason people took part in it. They knew what they were doing just as well as the people calling them on it and were pretty open about their sexism. They weren't career politicians trying to pander to a racist base without sparking major backlash, so they could quietly pass laws to prevent integration; they were gamers having their little boys club on the internet, being flagrantly sexist and bad faith. What even is this line of reasoning??
If you like this person as an artist and identify with the comic you can just say that and engage normally, if you don't then why would you go out of your way to defend them and suggest that their gender has anything to do with it? You don't have to keep explaining the same point, I know what you're saying and I disagree.
You're hilarious.
how can anyone dislike pizzacake, especially on leftist lemmy?
It's low hanging fruit, that's why. My reaction to most of her content is "no shit"
Also, her art style is just incredibly bland and uninteresting.
that's one way to say you haven't seen many of her comics
Freedom of Speech != Obligation to Listen
Yeah and it goes both ways. She can post her crap, and haters can hate. She can ignore them and they choose not to ignore her. That's where the conflict comes in.
The whole DMCA thing only made it worse. She exposed herself as a target for hatred and the haters love nothing more than for the enemy to expose their glowing weak point to shoot at.
But that's because if we want copyright and parody to coexist, they need to have limits. Parody gets a blanket license to reuse source material endlessly unless you can justify the expense of an attorney to hit a moving target that may be made from hundreds of individuals mocking your content. That's kind of shitty and almost impossible to defend against. It's like how you can't copyright a tweet because it is too short. But you should be able to copyright a body of tweets because aggregated they are (checks notes) not too short. In her case the bonehurtingjuice community turned into an active troll campaign to target every one of her comics to harass and demean her.
So in this case I do think the internet trolls on bhj were shitheads and were in the wrong. Even if that coexists with my opinion that her comics kind of suck. And frankly I think the current legal system is at fault for not having adapted to coordinated trolling. She's probably going to get killed by one of those gamergate nutjobs now that she's been doxxed.
The issue with doxxing that really frustrates me as a coder is that individual developers and companies are never held responsible for making negligently insecure software.
I've never blocked anyone. 14 years of reddit and now Lemmy and there has never been a reason to. I find it weird when people do it.
I get it if someone is harrasing you, but an anonymous disagreement? Meh, whatever. If I am done I just quit responding and move on.
I suppose being online since the 80's gives you a little bit of perspective. Don't feed the trolls, everyone is a liar, and nothing anyone says matters unless you want it to.
And never use social media.
I block people liberally. I agree 100% with the comic. And blocking idiots is good for my health.
I have seen people have some obnoxious weird idea about one thing and be brilliant about another. Not everyone, some are just trolls, but some people are really. Good at something interesting and have stupid ideas about others.
I am not so quick to just write everyone off, but I also find it easy to just not read things I don't care about.
I get that this is a specific experience. It just made me think about how so many people go for the block button on silly sites like this one..
There's a couple I've blocked, because they're simply incapable of having any type of discussion unless you're rabidly in agreement with them, and they immediately turn to insulting anyone who disagrees.
If you never had to block anyone, you might be in a more lucky spot. Just because you don't have or see a problem, does not mean the problem does not exist. Just a reminder.
It's the same as with racism, for example. If you're not part of a minority, or hide it well enough, you don't see the racism.
Or so I've heard. I'm also in a lucky spot.
Iβm like @[email protected] on the no-blocking-ever front.
None of us want Lemmy to be a Nazi bar, right? So if we see a Nazi on here and all of us block them today, they can circlejerk in a comment tomorrow and a newly registered user will see no one downvoted them or called them out.*
As a privileged person, I feel an obligation not to block anyone, and even feel Iβm abdicating my duty a little by not browsing logged out sometimes to make sure Nazis canβt block me and spread hate without counterpoints lodged against them.
*would a βwidely-blocked userβ tag help? Not if they create a new account after every other post, & scummy users could mitigate by proactively blocking using βSJW userβ lists, but itβs an idea
I had a long time on Reddit also and I haven't ever blocked anyone either. But I have blocked subreddits and communities here.
Yeah, same here. I just don't see the need to block people. Some might have a different opinion on one topic than me, but be no in agreement or have something worthwile to say on another.
If I was activly harassed or anything, I'd use the block function to protect myself from that. Never had to do that so far.
Anybody who immediatelly starts insulting others gets blocked.
I'm not interested in watching somebody's public self-masturbation shows: insulting others achieves nothing but give those doing the insulting the pleasure of thinking that they're hurting others - it won't convince the person they're replying to and it won't convince the audience (since an insult is as much an argument for a viewpoint as a punching somebody's face), so directly insulting random strangers is only for the pleasure of those doing it.
Further, people whose default reaction to disagreeing with others is to try and hurt them don't really deserve any of my time.
Being deep down in an argument, losing one's patience and ending up throwing insults is one thing, just being obnoxious and insulting from the get go is something else altogether and betrays a very different kind of character, one that there is no point in listening to.
I guess I just don't read it. It's that simple.
You have to read some of it until you get to the insults and mentally go "Oh, it's one of those", unless you have a mental list of usernames for those people in Lemmy (in all fairness, they're very few) or use an interface were you can tag users and see the tags (but tagging or blocking is about the same amount of work).
The only weirdo I know that blocks people left and right is one that signs every comment with a "no AI license" thingy. Anyone that correctly comments how that's useless/pointless because bots ignore that is blocked
I got some of the stalinist people like cowbee blocked because they are extremely annoying.
Some people make it clear that their ideas are not worth entering my head.
That's when they get the easy-block.
Honestly I've come around on pizzacake. I now think it's actually an impressive artistic feat to make a successful webcomic where your secondary main character is consistently a non-existent strawman.
It's like social commentary on social commentary, wrapped in countless layers of irony and meta, right?
Every time I see this comic I think "you totally had a confrontation you fumbled, then came up with a response a week later and made a comic to 'own' someone".
You're onto something here
I also just generally like the Mary Sue nature of drawing yourself into your own comics and making yourself look good under all circumstances. It really communicates a lack of narcissism and arrogance.
I like how you sarcasm.
Y'all gonna pretend the person in the comic isn't real? I've seen comments of that exact nature discussing people who block others before bruh, find a legitimate comic to post this on next time
That's fair criticism. In the comic at hand, you're right, they're not a non-existent strawman, as this strawman does exist. The apt critique for this specific comic is more about how blaringly obvious the conclusion that is being presented as revelatory is, so I shouldn't have used the word "non-existent" in this specific critique. Very fair, cheers.
edit: typo
Well, same way Stormtroopers wear helmets. You canβt really individualize them or people start to appreciate them and root for them, like they do every villain.
You will notice that it was not pizzacake that posted this.
Also I think we need a reset if we're at the point where critiquing and criticizing media is suddenly "being butthurt."
Pot/Kettle much? You haven't even engaged with my criticism, since I never once have called pizzacake's comics either "crazy" or "irrelevant" or any synonym thereof; if anything they're too pedestrian and "low-hanging fruit," the exact opposite of those critiques.
And you see, this right here is why some of us don't want pizzacake's bullshit here; it is seemingly impossible for people to engage with criticism of them honestly, for some unknown reason.
I have never once sought out a pizzacake comic to shit on. I have never once criticized pizzacake for anything outside the content of the art she has personally entered into the public square or her conduct in relation to said art. All I have ever done is engage with the art brought into the public square for consideration. This is c/comicstrips, not c/comicstripsycophantry, ostensibly a community for the discussion and consideration of this media form, not just a place for empty yes-manning.
So as for you, feel free to take your own advice and just block me if you find my content distasteful, but as for your assertion, you can kindly fuck right off with that.
You aren't even using that term right; I'm not asking for you to engage me in shit, nor am I feigning civility as I've been pretty clearly aggressive in my stance and told you to fuck off. Again, enormous pot/kettle projection. But hey, I'll save us both the trouble and do the blocking for you. π
Until these comments I didnβt know there was any drama around PizzaCake but goddamn this comic β¦ content, its content.
I'm not even sure this counts as drama. These people are addicted to wallowing in negativity. Gives me r/questionablecontent vibes, a subreddit about a webcomic where people purport to hate it but continue reading it every day just so they can get mad about it.
Like, I strongly dislike the Far Side, but despite how frequently it gets upvoted I don't go into every comment section to talk about why. I just blocked the sub and scroll past it when it shows up in other subs. The behavior in these threads is pathetic.
Why on earth would you hate the Far Side?
The art is awful and the jokes are either literal nonsense or annoyingly simple. Same kinda stuff being said in this thread. Same reasons anyone dislikes a comic. Just doesn't resonate. I can't say why people decide some stupid shit works for them and other stupid shit doesn't.
It's definitely absurd, that's very much the point.
And that's the punchline
wait, people hate Questionable Content? fucking why?
It became too "woke" compared to its early days (IDK why people who complain about that kind of thing ever read it, it never catered to rightwingers).
I haven't been reading it in years, but even back then there were multiple gay/lesbian main characters. The subject of ai civil rights (obvious minority allegory) was a somewhat frequent topic. I vaguely remember there being a couple pages dedicated to how the human/machine war never happened because a couple researchers decided not to be dicks to their freshly spawned ai and instead treated it with compassion and empathy.
the comic was always woke, we just didn't have a monosyllabic word for it back then.
At the start it was pretty hetero and white, IIRC. Dora might always have been bisexual, but it's easier to ignore if it's an informed trait rather than something that's actually visible. But I think the big giveaway that it was never going to go where rightwingers would want it is the way the main character interacted with these people.
Hate is a strong word, but it wasn't really that interesting after a while.
I can't really make an argument against that, considering that I stopped reading it years ago. Although I'll deflect blame and say that was due to my rss reader of choice being killed (google reader), so I stopped reading webcomics in general about that time.
I can understand why people might not like it. In effect, it's a sitcom with a gimmick, and there's tons of those on television (I actively despise all of them). I'll defend questionable content though because it has a setting and cast of characters that I've become invested in. However, I can see what it is, and I understand that it's not for everyone.
However, however, CONTEXT, specifically this conversation. People are allegedly hating on Jeph Jacques over on /r/questionablecontent just as hard as people are hating on pzzacake here. And to that I reiterate: fucking why?
edit: it helps if I do words in the right order.
Soap opera in comic form is exactly how I thought about the comic after a while. But yes, actively hating it is a bit harsh.
Just looked at the comic for the first time in years, and I am massively impressed by how his artistic skills have improved. Look at the current page vs page 1. If I didn't know better, I would not believe that it was done by the same person.
That's a valid opinion. Really doesn't explain the hate-readers, though.
Maybe people just got sick of seeing it posted? I'd never actively seek out a Pizzacake comic, but I do point out the many shortcomings when they show up here.
They could have blocked the sub instead of commenting every day and harassing the separate QC-sub that actually liked the comic. In contrast to Lemmy, on Reddit it's actually really easy to block comics you don't like, because they were usually posted to their own subs (and possibly even by a separate user, sometimes even the creator themselves like the Extra Fabulous guy) instead of a general sub/community like c/comicstrips.
In that case, I have no idea.
Why is this nsfw?
As a leftist, as a progressive, I long for a world where I never have to see these comics again. It's not that I disagree with them, they're just so goddamn annoying and low hanging fruit shit
If some rando did this exact scenario in ragemaker and posted it, with no connection to pizzacake, everyone would be talking about how relatable it is. I'd wager you'd be included in that 'everyone'.
And then if that rando did it every day for like five years, I'd get tired of their shit too.
except the situation you're describing is not happening.
Well that's kind of the point. It's low hanging fruit because everyone agrees with it. No one thinks you are obligated to argue with others, which is the straw man's position. It's not that you don't have a right to block critics, the question is "When is it a good idea?".
It sounds like a lot of people think the author does it too liberally, which can lead to an echo chamber. Most people would say creating a lawsuit against your critics is also an overreaction, but people have also been saying she gets harassed a lot. That makes it more reasonable if true.
"droll and repetitive" is some serious projection my apparently terminally online friend. I've never heard of this artist before in my life
Droll means amusing. You might have meant dull instead
It's been fascinating seeing this platform slowly turn against Pizzacake as more of her stuff gets posted.
So I'm fully expecting a big reaction given how much of a reaction this comic always provokes, I'm not a huge fan of pizzacake's art style or the whole negativity around it but I also haven't found a way to just filter it out without blocking the whole instance. I'm not attacking anyone though, you keep on enjoying this if you like, I'm just putting my thoughts out and I might just be missing an option.
Why did you tag NSFW
Why nsfw?
The word "bullshit." I usually like to err on the side of caution with this stuff.
No need here. Fuck, shit, piss, Satan, broccoli, gay butt sex.
In that order, or is there some flexibility here?
Go abso-fudging-lutely wild.
Iβm here for the gay broccoli Satan personally
Bottoms need a ton of fiber to keep the way clear.
B E L G I U M
It doesn't. If you're interested, you can look at the other comments where OP and I are having a conversation.
Does the NSFW marker take something away from this for you?
No, not at all. I'm just saying that you're putting unnecessary restraint on yourself. It MIGHT also be detrimental because a lot of people will avoid the post because they don't want to see, idk, boob or vageen or peen or a plate of broccoli (because they're in public). But that's your decision.
It doesn't feel like restraint to me, just an extra note for the benefit of anyone who happens to be at a workplace like mine where a big expletive on the screen might not be the best thing when the boss walks by. I do appreciate your perspective, though.
I mean, this text is, what, a few
centimillimetres tall at best, I wouldn't be able to read that "bullshit" without lurking on your shoulder. If your boss watches what you read that closely, you maybe shouldn't be on Lemmy at work, no?... or maybe you use absolutely massive screens at work. Like, billboard size? I want that job. π
I'm joshing you. Do whatever you like.
Edit: lol centi
I will never understand this.
What job do you have where your boss would care and you would get in trouble for the word "Fuck" appearing on your screen where you wouldn't get in trouble for just browsing Lemmy in general?
This has always felt like a solution in search of a problem to me.
Where in the world was I whining?
Using flags such as NSFW on non-NSFW posts devalues the flag, which means that next time I might actually unblur something when I shouldn't have because I assumed it was an incorrect flagging.
It makes me have to click the fucking image to find out whats going on underneath, so kinda clickbaity when its a nothing burger..
were you expecting boobs?
I was expecting boobs. but was surprised by PCC.
had a hearty chuckle when I realized all the PCC haters were going to click on it too and get mega triggered.
And of course, you wade in to defend your damsel's honour, as you always do.
Hey, why are you simping for the corporate takeover of the internet? Self-censoring in fear that the big bad Google or Meta will get mad at your no-no words and take them down. Fuck them. They are trying to sanitize the internet to make it more appealing for ads. Don't help them.
you should've just censored the word and then let everyone complain about that, it means more engagement
.......you can fucking curse on the fucking internet, asshole! What fucking kind of shitty bullshit do you think will happen if you piss off some cocksucking dickhead by saying shit?
Here, I'm going to do this shit for you. Just for you, I'm going to curse for you on the god damned internet. Get ready for this shit. Are you ready for me to fucking curse? Ok. Here we go!
ok sure but that doesn't mean it's appropriate for all people in all situations. you'll notice that they did, in fact still post it - they didn't censor it. they just tagged it NSFW.
there's been plenty of times when I'm bored at work, and could totally get away with browsing whatever on lemmy; but I don't feel like having a conversation with HR because someone walks by my desk. I'd much rather know there's something here that might offend someone (even if it doesn't offend me, or you personally for that matter).
You can curse online if you want to! You can curse at your friends online! Because friends all curse, and if they don't curse, well they're no friends of mine!
Holy fucking shit, did you just fucking curse on the internet. Eveyone know you cant fucking do that without the internet police coming to your home to beat your ass. Never fucking do that again you shit
/s (if its not obvious)
I wish blocking also prevented them from viewing my posts
Iβll block anybody I see posting ai crap regularly. I want to see as little of that garbage as possible.
it's annoying when power users contribute 90% quality content and 10% slop
Sometimes, the only winning move is not to play.
The irony of THIS comic is, you could apply that argument to every single opinion in existence.
Nobody is changing their mind from modern debates online. We are in a culture of anti-intellectualism. So there really is no point. I only block if someone is annoying or there is no point in engagement.
The Alt text on this is really well done. I'm going to use it as my example when I berate folks for not doing it.
Lovely. Thanks!
I appreciate that, thank you!
At least you know you're a dick
Generally, here there's less annoying people, and I'm less likely to see a dipshit again, so I don't block much.
On tumblr and mastodon? Anyone who's slightly annoying gets blocked.
edit: seeing some of the comments here has me rethinking this.
I block the losers posting AI slop. Can't force me to look at that trash.
Another daring and controversial take from Pizzacake.
It's really crazy how internet regressed in this regard. "Don't feed the troll" is been the moto of the web but not it's almost inverse. People try to justify this as justice seeking but its clearly doesn't work.
Maybe I should block more. People say you only need to block like five users to drastically improve your Lemmy experience.
Be normal on the internet about a female artist you don't like challenge (impossible).
I didn't enjoy the comic. Coincidentally, the author may be female.
Lol yepp
I don't block people. It's better to downvote them.
What is incredibly toxic is insulting someone and then blocking them, so they can't defend themselves.
Man all get comics these days seem to be mostly about people bothering her online. I get the desire to vent that frustration but it's been a while since I've seen anything else.
I block people who use insults and name-calling instead of conversation. Don't need that shit.
People I block don't deserve my energy more like. In social media sites that differentiate between blocking and muting I usually mute because they might learn something from me.
Just did that a minute ago.
I block people mostly because I don't want to upvote anything they have to say in the future. Usually because something they have said to me or someone else is so egregious that I don't care to know what else they might say.
The other reason comes down to harassment, or deliberate misuse of tags.
why do you ask? spam mainly
I really dislike this person's comics for some reason
Shouldn't block people. You can make good money by arguing
Ironic considering she could've just blocked the subreddit that made fun of her work instead of threatening to sue them. But hey, that's toxic people for you.
I gotta admit, I can't stand content I can't engage with. What's the point? It's just grandstanding and blowharding.
Block? Lmao
Pretty much.
Would the same anti-block people be okay with people showing up to their house, job, or on the street to argue about some stupid point? Why is it okay on social media? You have the right to tell people to go fuck off, it's called the 1st amendment.
Gosh I really don't like this art style but it's better than whatever I can draw so whatever.
Pizza Cake's art style is at least better than their humour. Absolute garbage comedic insight.
I'd frame it more as 'a comic artist is not spreading normative ideas. They're just using the ideas people already have and juxtaposing them to get a laugh. They aren't there for debate because no one should be taking a comic artist's ideas that seriously. e.g. Dilbert guy'
Double benefit from my perspective. I block people for three reasons, they are not mutually exclusive. Willful stupidity and being argumentative. If someone refuses to learn objective truth or insists I believe their objectively wrong position I have no need to interact with them in the future. Iβm done with them. The third reason is getting the last word, myself or them. I have a hard time shutting up sometimes, so if someone meets either of the above criterial and has to continue to keep commenting on any rebuttal I make I just block them. Thereβs no reason to allow myself to continue the interaction, and the other person has no interest in a good faith discussion.
i block rude and hateful people, itβs gotten bad on Lemmy recently but you can disagree with someoneβs point while agreeing with their overall belief system, in the most normal way and you get back name calling, hateful comments, lots of anger by people just waiting to throw shit at someone for anything. Used to be you could have a group of people who agree on a subject but not the execution, and you could have a discussion, now if your view doesnβt conform 100% you get treated like youβre garbage.
I don't block people unless it's an emergency
Really its the same as meatspace. You don't hang with folks you don't like or take phone calls from them. My dream is a block thats symetrical. Blocking is in some ways creepy because its only one way.
I don't give a damn about your argument, you're taking the web too serious. That's why i block yo ass because if you stopped being annoying i would just ignore you.
But alas you got nothing better to do, so it's a block.
Well this goes both ways
it does. the trolls never want to block people though. if they did, they wouldn't have anyone to play with.
lol just say they're wrong and platform your own position
Imagine getting triggered for something so simple and stupid.
Every block enforced your echo chamber, brick by brick.
This is why i don't block things in general. How could I possibly have the slightest bit of nuanced idea of what other people talk about, if i just block it?
Ok, blocked.
Just kidding. Debate is good, but unfortunately some of them is done in bad faith, either just for trolling, or because the oposing side just has no intention of even considering your arguments.
In both case, blocking is justified.
I tend to steer clear of online debate, i just want to see what is being written so that I don't get a skewed view. The only way to avoid the echo chamber is likely not participating in social media at all.
If I have the energy for it, I browse some classical forums, where you have to go through every reply. Kind of tedious, but atleast every post gets the same "weight".
I block people very rarely (I think I have just two or three blocks on Lemmy and Mastodon combined) but when I do it's because of tone, not because of content. I'm fine with reading things I don't agree with or that I think are disconnected from reality. As you say, it gives you an idea of what others think. But if someone is needlessly and consistently rude, I just don't need that in my life.
Never said that. I said I rarely block people in general, not that there are few trolls.
But sure, if you want to increase the size of my block list, calling my post "some bs" just because my experience is different from yours is probably a good start. Let's see if I'll stick around long enough to get so annoyed that I need to block you or if I just walk away.
You seem to enjoy being annoying for the sake of being annoying, but that doesn't mean anyone else does. Seems like a pretty lonely hobby actually.
I pity you.
I'm with you, to a degree. If I see someone clearly acting in bad faith and/or trolling, then they are just wasting my time.
However, if we have a disagreement of opinion, I don't feel right about blocking that someone. This would lead to a lonely existence, because the odds of having someone that agrees with every single one of my opinions is pretty low, so that means over time, I'd have blocked everyone.
Because you read (past tense) it before you blocked it?
also- It's certainly not hard to get a nuanced idea of others non-nuanced ideas.
Or read up on what their ideas are and not engage with the worst version of a person with that belief system.
That's the whole point. I don't want a "past tense" understanding of what is being said and written by "people".
Obviously spammers get blocked, cause they make it hard to read. The rest are just words and opinions. All of which I'm perfectly capable of dealing with.
ive debated these maga morons for nearly a decade. i'm done. there's no amount of logic or facts that will ever save them.
Devils advocate hat ON: I recon they feel the same way about you. What's the play? Just ignore them while they take over your country? Do you think that you can solve the problem without infringing on peoples right to listen to whatever they want?
Not sure what the play should be, but evidently debating them online in good faith isn't it. Violent revolution perhaps.
there are other, more effective ways to fight back than to argue with an inanimate object.
I dunno, the censorship is what creates an echo chamber on lemmy.
Man, this post gave me so many new people to block!
True, but isn't that the definition of a totalitarian?
A person refusing to waste time on a troll has literally, fundamentally, and atomically nothing to do with totalitarianism
This would be true if exactly the two people are involved but after that you are not the only one affected, also who is to say they are a troll or have a valid opinion? If it is an individual then that is definitionally a totalitarian.
Sure, in a wildly extreme version of it and only when the goverment does it. So, basically not at all.
Many of the people who demand βdebateβ have no real interest in engaging properly, they just want to spew their shit without consequence. People are getting really tired of it and having to constantly do the legwork for them since theyβre not even willing to try a little bit or even learn when obvious facts are presented in their little βdebatesβ.
First things first, what is a government? Because many corporations have more soft and hard power than the majority of all governments through history, the same can be said about certain influencers, is it simply the Monopoly on violence? Because that seems awfully arbitrary and means any bully is a government, I would argue the principal behind it is far more important than some arbitrary definition of government that even international bodies don't agree on.
Second thing second, sure, many, people argue in bad faith, many are improper many are etc but certainly not all and certainly not every influencer or company should be the absolute arbiter of Truth and moral.
"there are some similarities so they are the same because it supports my argument"
βWhat is governmentβ oh my god itβs a comic you pea-brained pseudo-intellectual. Actually just shut the fuck up.
Oh no, Iβm being totalitarian!
It is just a comic, just like trump is just joking about Tariffs and infact the very idea of him ever getting elected is a meme and a joke, or the Flat Earth theory, that is sooooo funny, or how about the Tide Pod challenge, wasn't that funny????????? Or remember all that time ago when school shootings were a Joke? Wasn't that sooooooooo funny ???? π€£ππ€£π€£π€£
Free speech means you don't get arrested for it, doesn't mean anyone is required to listen
No, free speech means you have the right to speak, if you're talking about some government I don't know of it is irrelevant.
It still doesn't mean the right to be listened
It does mean people have the right to hear, and When high profile people are able to censor it is taking away from the open market of ideas as much as any government, sure, you specifically do not have to argue anything, and I am ok with that but it is a fine line to censorship, including for other political powers or corporations, it happens in real life with real influencers all the time.
Don't feed the troll. Block it instead.
People are in control of what they see. It's their lemmy. Block away! Or ban if you run a instance/community.
Whatever
Fair point, but the traffic compared to the vast majority of socal networks is irrelevant to say the least.
I love it when you bunch come out with your whataboutisms and other bs on PCC posts.
it makes it so much easier to block you.
And I love it when you bunch come out with censorship immediately proving my point.