A Schipperke who Sketches

All of these are real examples. Maya and The Three introduces one of it's main protagonists, Ricco, by having him pretend to be missing a leg in order to con people (something that works on the protagonist, at least at first), Buffy The Vampire Slayer had the character Spike, pretend to be in a wheelchair, until the other characters leave and he gets up, revealing it's all a ruse and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory introduces Wonka by having him slowly limp out into the courtyard of the factory, only for his cane to get stuck, causing him to "fall" and jump back up, revealing that he's actually perfectly fine. Virtually every single major crime show in the past few decades has used this trope too, from CSI to The Mentalist, Castle, Law and Order and Monk all having at least one episode featuring it in some way. Even the kids media I grew up with isn't free from it; The Suite Life of Zack & Cody sees Zach faking being dyslexic after meeting someone who actually has the condition in the episode Smarter and Smarter and the SpongeBob SquarePants episode Krabs vs Plankton has Plankton fake needing a wheelchair (among other injuries) after falling in the Krusty Krab as a ploy to sue Mr Krabs and trick the court into giving him the Kraby Patty Formula.

No matter the genre or target audience though, one thing is consistent: this trope is used as a way to show someone is dishonest and not to be trusted. When the trope is used later in the story, it's often meant to be a big reveal, to shock the audience and make them mad that they've been duped, to show the characters and us what this person (usually a villain) is willing to stoop to. Revealing the ruse early on though is very often used to establish how sleazy or even how dangerous a character is and to tell the audience that they shouldn't trust them from the get go. Gene Wilde (The actor who first played Willy Wonka) even said in several interviews that this was his intent for Wonka's character. He even went so far as to tell the director of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory that he wouldn't do the film without that scene because of how strongly he felt this trope was needed to lay the foundations for Wonka's questionable intentions and motivations. His exact words are: "...but I wouldn't have done the film if they didn't let me come out walking as a cripple and then getting my cane stuck into a cobble stone, doing a forward somersault and then bouncing up... the director said, well what do you want to do that for? and I said because from that point on, no one will know whether I'm telling the truth or lying."

There's... a lot of problems with this trope, but that quote encapsulates one of the biggest ones. whether intentionally or not, this trope ends up framing a lot of actual disabled people as deceitful, dishonest liars. Now I can already hear you all typing, What?! Cy that's ridiculous! No one is saying real disabled people are untrustworthy or lying about their disabilities, just people who are faking!

but the thing is, the things often used in this trope as "evidence" of someone faking a disability are things real disabled people do. A person standing up from their wheelchair or having scuff-marks on their shoes, like in the episode Miss Red  from The Mentalist isn't a sign they're faking, a lot of wheelchair users can stand and even walk! They're called ambulatory wheelchair users, and they might use a wheelchair because they can't walk far, they might not feel safe walking on all terrains, they might have unstable joints that makes standing for too long risky, they might have a heart condition like POTS that has a bigger impact when they stand up or any number of other reasons. Also even non-ambulatory wheelchair users will still have scuff marks from things like transferring and bumping into things (rather hilariously, even TV Tropes calls this episode out as being "BS" in it's listing for this trope, which it refers to as Obfuscating Disability). A blind beggar flinching or getting scared when you pull a gun on them isn't a sign they're faking their blindness like it is in Red Dead Redemption 2. Plenty of blind people can still see a little bit, it might only be a general sense of light and darkness, it might be exceptionally blurry or just the fuzzy outlines of shapes, or they might only be able to see something directly in front of them, all of which might still be enough to cue the person into what's happening in a situation like that. Even if it's not, the sound of you pulling your gun out or other people nearby freaking out and making noise probably would tip them off. A person needing a cane or similar mobility aid sometimes, but being able to go without briefly or do even "big movements" like Wonka's rolling somersault, doesn't mean they don't need it at all. Just like with wheelchairs, there's a lot of disabilities that require canes and similar aids some days, and not others. Some disabilities even allow people those big, often straining movements on occasion, or allow them to move without the aid for short periods of time, but not for long. Some people's disability's might even require a mobility aid like a cane as a backup, just in case something goes wrong, but that still means you need to carry it around with you, and unless it can fold down, it's easier to just use it.

Disability is a spectrum, and a lot of disabilities vary in severity and what is required of the people who have them day to day. This trope, however, helps to perpetuate the idea that someone who does any of these things (and many others) is faking, which can actively make the lives of disabled people harder and can even put them in very real danger, physically, mentally and even financially.

Just ask any ambulatory wheelchair user about how many times they've been yelled at for using accommodations they need, like disabled toilets or parking spaces. How many times they've been accused of faking and even filmed without their consent because they stood up in public, even if it was to do something like get their wheelchair unstuck or as simple as them standing to briefly reach something on a high shelf. I've caught multiple people filming me before, so have my friends and family, and it's honestly scary not knowing where those images have ended up. This doesn't just impact the person either, a friend of mine was filmed while standing up to get his daughter (who was about 4 at the time) out of the car. He was lucky to have stumbled across the video a few days later on facebook and contacted the group admins where it was posted to get it taken down, but had he not stumbled across it by chance, pictures with his home address and his car's number plate, his child's face and his face all visible would have just been floating around, all because a woman saw him stand briefly to pick up his daughter.

Many people don't stop at just saying a nasty comment or taking a photo though, a lot of people, when they suspect people are faking, will get violent. I have many friends who have been pushed, slapped in the face, spat on or had their mobility devices kicked out from under them. I've even been in a few situations myself where, had I not had people with me, I think the situation would have turned violent.

There's even been cases where those photos and videos I've mentioned before have been used against real disabled people and they've been reported to their country's welfare system as committing disability fraud. While cases like this are usually resolved *relatively* quickly, in many parts of the world, their payment will be halted while the investigation is in process, meaning they may be without any income at all because of someone else's ignorance. If you're already struggling to make ends meet (which, if you're only living off one of those payments, you probably will be), a few weeks without pay can mean the difference between having a home and being on the streets.

Not to mention that when there's so many stories about people faking a disability in the media, especially when the character is doing it to get some kind of "advantage", such as getting accommodations or some kind of disability benefit, it perpetuates the idea that people are rorting the systems put in place to help disabled people. If this idea becomes prevalent enough, the people in charge start making it harder for the people who need them to access those systems, which more often than not results in disabled people not even being able to access the very systems that are supposed to be helping them. A very, very common example of this is in education where accommodations for things like learning disabilities require you to jump through a ridiculous number of hoops, especially at higher levels, only to have some teachers and professors refuse to adhere to the adaptations anyway because they're convinced the student (and usually disabled students as a whole) is faking.

Blog name patterns

You might have noticed how default blog urls here have four random words stuck together, and early bots used a similar pattern. But it has evolved. I recall seeing names that were two or three random words and a two digit number, typically from 20 to 50, presumably meant to be seen as a person's age. Like these:

Then a different pattern was used, like two or three words then a hyphen then a number. Then another, like a first name mixed in with random words, etc. Now, it's harder to see a pattern, so some bot names now look more (or less) random... more like real blogs. If you see a new follower with a random name, it doesn't mean much, but if you see more and more followers with names that seem to fit a pattern (and it's not simply the tumblr default username pattern), then chances are, they are bots created with the same or a similar program. Here's an example of getting new followers where the names seem too random to be real but you don't really notice until you get a bunch in a row, and the randomness is itself a pattern:

Profile pics that real tumblrs wouldn't choose

Often they used to have closeups of female faces. Now they still tend to have pictures of women, but not so zoomed in, and some even feature two women. Like here:

Notice that three of the above examples follow a naming pattern of what could be actual people names and a number. The fourth is like that, too, but with a hyphen tossed in.

And bots sometimes have default profile pics that may or may not be changed later, so watch out for default pfp's that later get replaced with pics of random women. Usually young and somewhat attractive. Most of the bots are geared towards attracting hetero men, hence the female pfp's of generally attractive women. The hope is we see one of these pics and think that's actually what the blogger looks like.

Truth is, Tumblrs rarely choose pfp's like that. This isn't the kind of social media platform where we typically show our faces (unless it's a personal fashion or cosplay blog, and then we are probably wearing makeup and costumes). We choose pics of plants and animals, fictional characters, historical figures, celebrities, artwork, etc. It's unusual for us to market ourselves based on personal appearance. So, when you see a blog with a pfp that looks like it's from Instagram or LinkedIn... or from a dating profile... it's probably fake. They are just random pics found online and essentially stolen from whoever originally uploaded them.

Default header images or more random women

Usually, bots have blank or default blog header images (see the examples above). I used to see a lot of bot blogs where the pic used for the header is the same as the pfp; those usually have descriptions where it's just a name and a suggestive emoji or a name and a plug for dirty pictures. Like:

More recently, they've started using images that show women who match or at least look like the women in their pfp's, but they aren't the same photos. Just like those pfp's, the header images are likely stolen from profiles elsewhere or random pics online. The ones that have header images that "work" with the pfp's also have a tendency to include links in their blog descriptions.

Sus blog descriptions or none at all

Most bot blogs lack blog descriptions entirely or just have a name or something about photos, like those examples above. But lately I've been seeing ones where there's a short description. In those cases, it's usually a link to who knows where, and it's best not to even find out. The text, whether there's a link or not, is usually an age (assume that's fake), something about the person's identity or preferences (often of a sexual nature), sometimes a reference to ranking on OnlyFans (it wants you to think any link there might take you to that sort of content), and a collection of oddly chosen emojis mixed into it.

Zero posts or sus posts and reblogs

A lot of legit blogs are created for the sole purpose of following content they want... and maybe asking questions, usually as anons. Those "don't follow me, I'm just lurking" type blogs rarely post or even reblog anything. Most bots also take this approach.

But some reblog sexually suggestive posts and some reblog more explicit content -- even links advertised as naughty games -- but the most realistic looking ones reblog a mix of sexual and innocuous, even innocent-looking content. As you scroll down through images of puppies, mysteriously inviting landscapes, and teacups next to open books... you eventually find images and even sometimes gifs of very mature content. Often with suggestive emojis and links that should be avoided at all costs. Some even just make one or two posts with links and leave the blogs untouched for years. Like this one:

This blog only has one post, and it's from 2019. Claims about some free training program that'll earn you large incomes. Notice the tags on it are kind of generic, and some don't fit, like #home #decor #gardening. But it's a link to... something.

They might try to chat, but what they say is sus

It's very rare, in my experience, but I will occasionally get a dm from a random blog that just doesn't sit right.

Sure, sometimes a new follower will contact me to let me know they found my blog and enjoy it. Even longtime, mostly silent readers/followers will occasionally decide to reach out and privately tell me they were a particular anon in an ask... or simply that they finally found the nerve to say hi. That's all fine and dandy.

But when a new follower (who doesn't seem to share interests with you or has interests that don't match your blog topic) or a random content blog that doesn't even follow you just dms with "hi" or "how are you?", I get very suspicious it's just a bot. Their blog might look default or not but lacks content. It might be full of content that simply has nothing to do with your content. And they send a random starter message, completely open to your response. You can test them by asking if they are a bot. If they ignore that and respond with something like "I'm lonely" or "what are you doing tonight?", they are definitely a bot. If they say "no I'm not a bot" (or something like that) then ask leading questions like the "what are you doing" one, they might not be a bot, but they are likely just phishing/scamming.

One of the best tests is to ask them what they think about your own blog posts. If they ignore that and act like they might be following a script? Bot. If they say something very generic, like "I like it a lot" but immediately change the subject back to personal questions or something phishy (might also be a bit scripted)? Scammer. Either way, best to report the chat as spam, which will also remove the conversation from your view.

It's often not one thing but a combination

If you get followed by a blog that looks completely default, the best thing to do is maybe dm them to ask if it's a real person/legit blog. If they don't respond within a decent timeframe, they might just be too shy, but chances are they are a bot. If they respond with something that feels too general or scripted, probably either a bot or a scammer -- some are sleepers that wait for you to contact them. But a blog just being default doesn't mean it's bad; it could be a shy lurker or it could be someone new to tumblr who hasn't chosen pics, themes, etc. yet.

However, if you see a follower pop up (either new or their blog has changed since they started following), and the blog has some combo of the traits mentioned above, chances are super high it's a bot.

What bots do

I'm not entirely certain about all the different things they can do, and some of the things are likely more harmful than others.

I've gleaned a few ideas from posts I've read about the bots, though, including a good one I saw that had been reblogged by Neil Gaiman. I reblogged it from him, though I might have moved it to @aby-off-topic.

My understanding is that the same creator (person or program) makes a whole bunch of them. And there are probably many different individual creators, each making large groupings of them. Some of the bot blogs have content, usually of a sexual nature but occasionally not, like cryptocurrency or some random-sounding business venture. Those will have links to other sites, though some might actually link to other, related blogs in the same grouping. The content blogs also tend to be full of various tags, typically reusing key tags copied from the posts they reblog. If they have "original" posts, those will probably have the same key tags. The grouped content blogs boost each other and make their suspicious content become more noticeable to users who follow certain tags. It mostly clutters those tags with useless content, annoying those tag followers. But the point of them is to lure in the occasional individual who doesn't know any better; once they click a link, they could fall victim to stuff like:

Automatic exposure to malware

Mature content that requires payment (and might steal personal and financial information at the same time)

Phishing attacks of various kinds

Cryptocurrency and/or NFT scams

Companies that sell fake products (like cheap knockoffs, items that just don't work as promised, and items that are never shipped and might not even exist in stock/inventory)

People who try to recruit for MLM (multi level marketing), pyramid schemes, and similar money pits. These days it could still include wasteful timeshare programs, but now there are AirBnB scams and all sorts of things. Something that requires a time and money commitment and promises profit or some other benefit, but it just drains your energy and funds. Someone profits, but it's not you.

The bots that have no content except links in their descriptions are just hoping someone clicks. Then the unwitting person might fall prey to the same things listed above.

Bots that just follow but have zero content? Well, that's possible but not always true. The ones that truly have zero content might want you to interact with them in messages. Other bots don't have any posts or reblogs, but they might allow you to see the posts they've ❤️'d and/or the blogs they follow. You have to check out their Likes and Follow tabs to get this information, so it makes the blogs seem kind of legit and innocent. You are snooping around their blog, after all, right? But some of the posts they "like" and some of the blogs they follow will send unsuspecting individuals down a rabbit hole that might quickly lead to content blogs with those same suspicious links and too-good-to-be-true schemes.

Harming your blog

Ultimately, their main goals are to part people from their money and steal information. But they can cause problems for your blog, too. Like:

Decreased exposure 1: By making your posts disappear in a sea of junk posts with the same tags, it might be harder for new readers to find your content that matches their interests.

Decreased exposure 2: Similarly, people who follow certain tags and typically read your content that way might stop following those tags. They might choose to follow you directly, but they might not. They might unfollow a tag and then realize they don't recall your blog name. Some will be interested enough to figure it out and others won't.

Damaging your reputation: It's not common now, and changes to the website/app might have actually helped to stop this, but some blogs used to reblog others' posts with one or more images, remove the original text, then add their own links and tags. This happened to several of my old posts, too, and the alterations made it look like I'd posted manga panels or whatever with a link to a porn site or something. I had to report the reblogs and also assure readers that my original posts didn't contain these potentially harmful links. To get this remedied, I think I had to use a special reporting method that allowed me to give the Tumblr reps specific information about what the blogs were doing to my post content. I also explained that those blogs were doing the same thing to posts from other bloggers. Were they truly bots? Idk, but possibly.

Simply put, they can decrease your exposure to readers, make the tagging feature less useful for everyone, and even cause a PR nightmare for your blog. All in the name of trying to scam the occasional person who falls into their traps.