Every third word is a typo

Don't get me wrong: I investigate warnings, and I act on them if they're true and relevant. But callout posts are, on a very fundamental level, not about what people say they're about. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they're made for one or more of the following reasons:

OP didn't like the subject to begin with (often for bigoted reasons), and they wanted a reason, and a following, to justify and validate that.

OP wanted to gain popularity, so they made themselves look like either a victim, a hero, or both.

OP wanted to claim victim status in a private falling-out in order to preserve good standing with their own friends/their community.

OP didn't like what the subject was saying, and wanted to silence them (often for bigoted reasons).

OP genuinely just wants "revenge" on the subject, or otherwise wants to ruin their reputation and have them sent harassment.

Again, there are exceptions: there are "callouts" that just unravel a subject's lies, or point out problems in already public actions. If OP is claiming to have been personally victimized in a legitimately serious way, and especially one that indicates the subject might be a danger to others, I'm definitely more willing to believe it- one obvious example being sexual violence.

But oftentimes, callouts are incredibly personal, misleading, emotionally manipulative, blatantly untrue, or all of the above.

This person came to me on anon; I have absolutely no way of knowing what their motives are or how trustworthy they are. There is no credibility or accountability here.

And I did read the post. Lo and behold, it's riddled with emotionally manipulative language, false accusations, and the biggest reaches I've ever seen:

"DON'T READ THIS CALLOUT, IT'S SO TRIGGERING TO EVERYONE, JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. But the proof is here if you REALLY don't believe me"

"Proof" is a scarce handful of screenshots taken out of context that contain emotionally evocative language, but do not support the accusations at all.

Some accusations are genuinely just weird logic leaps with no support, others are matters of personal opinion obviously driven by bigoted motives.

OP themselves expresses very publicly that they believe people who are marginalized in the ways the subject are, who speak on that marginalization, should be silenced.

I try to assume good faith here, and I want to believe this anon was just guilt-tripped and manipulated by the post in question. I don't hold any ill will here.

But anon, I want you to ask yourself:

Are the accusations you're making something you have personally investigated and found to be true?

Does this person deserve the harassment and ostracization they will likely receive as a result of your accusations?

Will you hold yourself accountable for the damage you've caused if you're wrong?

This past month, Parks & Rec has been doing a lot of work on the field adjacent to my school. They have trucks with flatbeds, mowing/tree-cutting/postholing machinery, etc. And when they arrived, I (campus monitor) was told I would need to herd the kids away from the trucks/machinery and basically prevent them from creating a dangerous situation.

So when recess came around and the kids stampeded out the door I held them up and I said (being funny but at the same time serious, you know how it is, kids listen better if you're funny)

"Okay, I know that you're all smart AND mature, right? And talented and good looking? Definitely the smartest and most talented class in this school? (I say this to every class, they're all 'my favorites'.) And because you're SO intelligent and mature, I don't need to actually TELL you that these guys have vehicles and machinery that you need to stay clear of, right? Because I know you figured that out already, and I also know that YOU know how sad I would be if any of you were run over, or squashed, or had a pole fall on you. I would be SO SAD, like, I would probably have to lie down on the floor and cry. So you're not going to make me cry, right? I can trust you to stay away from the trucks and machines no matter where they are on the field? Because you're wonderful and amazing? My favorites? My inspiration?"

And they're laughing at me of course, because I'm being so dramatic. Some of them are "Yes, and-"ing my dramatics and inventing more involved mourning processes I should undertake if any of them get run over. Some of them are yelling at me that they are NOT mature yet and they are VERY STUPID and I should know this.

It's been three weeks. We had one conversation about it. None of them have gone anywhere near the trucks. This is actually in excess of the typical elementary-schooler's working memory and I'm very proud of them. I haven't had to blow the whistle at ONE person for getting too close even when the trucks were literally 40 feet from the actual playground.

fifa kills whales 💔

Wyland has said any financial recovery from the suit would support public art, ocean conservation, and environmental education through his foundation.

but I'm hearing there's a NSFW-friendly ko-fi alternative built on atproto that's actively in the works, and being vetted by lawyers right now. as torrent-princess (OP) says, you should be able to swap out payment processors while keeping your account intact. this matters since even if stripe removes support, you'll still have a shop and all of your links intact. (ATproto is an infrastructure that bsky is built on, but is far bigger than bsky with far more opportunities.)

additionally, the Free Speech Coalition is working on a credit union specifically for adult work (including kink art) - here's the link so you can add your interest & support. Since this will be built by sex workers, there'll be far less risk of being debanked for spurious and puritanical reasons.

on a domain TLD level, there's an initiative here for a .furry domain built from the ground up by seasoned furries; it's unclear whether they'll support NSFW, but it's yet another promising turn of events for a group that's been similarly affected by censorship.

however, using my excellently trained netbattle brain I quickly discovered how to counter PoisPhar

"get a second job"

"start your own garden"

"stop buying name brand"

"don't get your nails done"

"learn to budget"

"live within your means"

and also no.

Because if they have a wait based bias, they are 100% not spending enough time on you so you are not lying and you can probably prove it with the notes they take regarding that they aren't ordering tests because of your weight.

I know it opens the door for them to lose a case, they know it, and know you know it!

(p.s. this also works for marginalized groups or other biases as well. You are having autoimmune and they won't test for anything and treat you for MS because you are a woman? Have them note they are refusing tests and mention you feel they aren't spending enough time on you or that they are providing a substandard level of care. You are black and the cardiologist assumes you have congenital heart issues and won't test for anything else? Same deal. You are young and they won't test you for colon cancer? Hit em. You are neurodivergent and they won't treat you for whatever psychological issues you have and say it's an element of your neurodivergent diagnosis? Slap em in the face with these words.)

If you ever can't get a test you are interested in, the above post is incredibly on point, but also mention that your care is substandard or they aren't spending enough time on you and they will have the "oh fuckballs I'm about to get sued!" Thoughts eat away at their brain.

For reference, I work in healthcare data (often clinical outcomes) and sometimes have to provide evidence in cases and I always hear the outcomes. If it's in your chart they refuse a test, they lose. Most doctors know it, and even more know the red flags of a potential malpractice suit.

If a doctor explains a cost and why they think it is unnecessary that it is different, med schools are including cost conscious testing into the education. That isn't a refusal but the sign of a doctor working with you, even if it is frustrating if they are still willing to order the test they are just managing that situation.

Further, at large practices, many Docs are encouraged to limit testing (especially if they are reimbursed, paid, or have incentives based on patient health. The medical view of "overweight" as an "unhealthy lifestyle" in many cases (regardless of the reality of it) and thus anything even can be even slightly tangentially linked reduces the doctors perceived quality of care and pushes it onto the patients fault/responsibility this protecting the physicians paycheck. I'm not for a second saying I agree with what I wrote but I am putting awareness that in some cases there is a systematic problem that encourages weight-biased (or other biases) into the healthcare decision making process. (These models are not unique to the home country of the US but also incredibly common in single-payer and universal-payer systems.)