Boxleys embarassing old rambles blog

no.

7 years ago patricia was in a discord with people older than her that were coercing her to do sexual things. one of those were to jerk off in a voicechat with adults.

one 15 year old entered, patricia imediately stopped and the minor was told to leave, they left.

much later patricia apologized to them.

in a different part of the discord that was general, patricia sent a picture of some youtube guys rantsona that was nsfw, she saw it as a joke. she doesnt think it was appropriate and has apologized to the people who saw that.

its been 7 years since then. she was around 19 back then. she is no longer being coerced. and has never repeated these actions.

if what patricia did as a groomed teen makes her dangerous, then you can argue every edgey teen bordering on adult making dumb social faux pas is forever to be labeled a creep and shunned.

i read dipper goes to taco bell to people because i thought the over the top sexgross stuff was funny, and those people were younger than me. it might have been inappropriate, but i wont be shunned because thats a disproportionate reaction to my action.

rooster teeth had a show where theyd go on rule34 and joke around about the images. they put that in public where kids are, are they to be shunned? should all awkward teens be shunned forever?

no.

there is a harrassment campaign aimed at patricia to make her seem dangerous, she is not, she is not hurting anybody. she is the one being hurt. and this whole thing reeks of DARVO.

stop trying to paint transwomen as monsters. stop buying into the lies and disinformation spread by people who hate her.

the actual people from 7 years ago have already been apologized to. what more do you think should happen?

Creating Characters With Narcissistic Personality Disorder: A Sensitivity Guide

The book widely considered to be the foundational text of modern transfeminism, openly downplays and erases discrimination against trans men and nonbinary people. Saying that the masculinity of trans men is "never questioned" and that nonbinary people are simply not expressing their "true sex".

This 18 year old book is still regularly upheld as gospel and used as a bludgeon against transmasculine and nonbinary theorists. Despite the author disavowing many of the flaws of her book, and openly stating that other trans people would benefit from terminology to describe their experiences.

Despite material evidence that trans men do not benefit from any systemic level of male privilege (even in comparison to trans women), much of transfeminist theory relies on the assumption that trans men are privileged over trans women; in a pointless effort to map transfeminism 1:1 onto cisfeminism.

A significant portion of self-proclaimed transfeminists on social media are dismissive at best, and explicitly bigoted at worst towards other trans people.

The transfeminism tag on this site is borderline unusable because of the amount of people who spend more time trying to come up with reasons to silence transmasculine people rather than addressing the actual material concerns of trans people. Many of the posts use transphobic and misogynistic slurs, on top that. People are out here theorizing about "afab privilege" and calling it transfeminism!

I would assume that this is an individual problem or a loud minority of the community, but the very basis of academic transfeminism has consistently ignored, downplayed and dismissed the oppression of basically everyone who isn't a binary white trans woman.

rehabilitation and reintegration are, for the majority of people, not only possible but also desirable, and shame is a direct inhibitor to both of these.

people need to acknowledge and take accountability for their actions, yes. they need to understand who they hurt, and how. they need to understand any underlying problems and causational factors for their offending or actions. they need to understand the impact of their environment and social circles on their offending. those are all big steps and they take a lot of self-reflection. but they're all possible, especially when we make rehabilitative programmes available to people.

the core purposes of criminal justice should, theoretically, be rehabilitation, restoration, and reparation. but many people are far too focused on revenge and punishment for it to work that way. this leads not only to offenders being over-punished, ostracised, and institutionalised (making reoffending far more likely) but it also does absolutely nothing to help victims! we have to change the way we collectively view crime and justice if we want to improve outcomes for everyone.