by "versions" i mean the album variants, of which there were 36 for the tortured poets department. she isnt alone in doing this but the practice itself generally annoys people, hence the discourse

the only criticism ive seen that connects to this is that she released like 36 versions of her last album so that fans would buy multiples + boost sales figures. this isnt unique to her, though. still, i think its a fair critique overall about how artists try to capitalize off of obsessive stans.

just watched the same video and could not help but note the red pill (by their own admission) and conservative dudes in the comments. kinda telling when you look at who the video was appealing to!

yeah to be fair i did NOT finish the video once i clocked where it was going. ive heard these points before, just with different context. i was a little sus when she was talking about women writers writing on the cutting edge of social "agendas' or whatever then it got worse

found this tweet bc i got ten minutes into her video and was like ok... i need a second opinion lmao. lots of generalizations, bioessentialism, etc. starts from the premise that erotic = bad, slippery slope arguments, etc. felt very TERFy but your angle i can see as well

happy birthday!!!

i have no issue with the individual works be critiqued but the method here is deeply concerning. using payment processors to strong arm companies into restricting works is even more and sets a terrible precedent. they did the same thing against OF sw-ers as well. these lobbyists are not allies.

its not a fallacy when it's literally their intent - they start small and unobtrusive and, once the pathway is there, keep pushing boundaries. culturally, we are not in a place to get rid of only the "bad" works because of how deeply the religious right and radfems have infiltrated these movements

this isnt just about rape, though. this is religiously motivated, and if the book bannings we've seen are anything to go by, queer media is next. call out specific games as you see fit but this approach is a bad precedent to set, especially because perfectly normal games are being caught up in it

gotcha. yeah, i agree.

king or the guy im replying to? king is always going back and forth with conservatives so for him to miss such a big fuck up would surprise me

and the admin lied when it said it had it. this is it exactly.

5) hes criticizing the trump admin for saying they had a list and would release it

hes calling trump a liar for claiming there was a list before

hes calling out the admin for saying the thad a list like two months ago. he isnt defending epstein or anything

all i saw was a post saying he thought it was fake. which could be a criticism of the admin, and less a comment on epsteins operation. its close enough for me to kinda just sit and wait for some clarification.

what ive seen is a tweet by him saying the list is fake, not that he doesnt want it released. kinda crazy to see how people are running with it ngl

i took it to mean hes calling the investigation into epstein a lie, and that the promises made by the administration were just lies. not that theres no one to put on a list, but that the administration just made a fuss about the list as a teaser without any intention of compiling anything